2030 Agenda and India: Moving From Quantity To Quality

South Asia Economic and Policy Studies
Sachin Chaturvedi
T. C. James
Sabyasachi Saha
Prativa Shaw Editors
2030 Agenda and

India: Moving from
Quantity to Quality
Exploring Convergence and
Transcendence
Series Editors
Sachin Chaturvedi, Director General, RIS for Developing Countries, New Delhi,
India
Mustafizur Rahman, Distinguished Fellow, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD),
Dhaka, Bangladesh
Abid Suleri, Executive Director, Sustainable Development Policy Institute,
Islamabad, Pakistan
Dushni Weerakoon, Executive Director, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka,
Colombo, Sri Lanka
The Series aims to address evolving and new challenges and policy actions that
may be needed in the South Asian Region in the 21st century. It ventures niche and
makes critical assessment to evolve a coherent understanding of the nature of
challenges and allow/facilitate dialogue among scholars and policymakers from the
region working with the common purpose of exploring and strengthening new ways
to implement regional cooperation. The series is multidisciplinary in its orientation
and invites contributions from academicians, policy makers, practitioners, consul-
tants working in the broad fields of regional cooperation; trade and investment;
finance; economic growth and development; industry and technology; agriculture;
services; environment, resources and climate change; demography and migration;
disaster management, globalization and institutions among others.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15400

Sachin Chaturvedi T. C. James
• •
Sabyasachi Saha Prativa Shaw

•
Editors
2030 Agenda and India:

Moving from Quantity
to Quality
Exploring Convergence and Transcendence
123
Editors
Sachin Chaturvedi T. C. James
RIS for Developing Countries RIS for Developing Countries
New Delhi, Delhi, India New Delhi, Delhi, India
Sabyasachi Saha Prativa Shaw

RIS for Developing Countries RIS for Developing Countries
New Delhi, Delhi, India New Delhi, Delhi, India
ISSN 2522-5502 ISSN 2522-5510 (electronic)

ISBN 978-981-32-9090-7 ISBN 978-981-32-9091-4 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Foreword
The Declaration by the United Nations in September 2015 of the 17 goals, spanning
all aspects of the development, to be achieved by 2030, has been an epoch-making
event. It opened a new window of development and gently spread the breeze of
sustainability all across the economic and social dimensions of progress. Followed
by the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in 2016, nations have agreed to place
nature along with human beings at the centre of national development model.
India is fully committed to the 2030 Agenda, and it is mirrored in our own
national development agenda. This commitment towards the Agenda 2030 con-
verges with India’s mission for inclusive, equitable and sustainable growth and is
amply resonated by the developmental motto of “Sabka Sath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka
Vishwas”. Given India’s growth trajectory, the priorities have been set for the
implementation of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in several areas of
socio-economic and environmental development. The issue of sustainability is
substantially mirrored in the flagship programmes of India like Clean India, Make
in India, Digital India, POSHAN Abhiyaan (Nutrition Campaign), National Health
Mission, Skill India and Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (for girl child).
Soon after the UN declaration, India energised its institutional framework for
defining clear strategies and programmes and also for identifying national priorities
and national indicators for monitoring SDGs. Within the federal set-up of the
country, the National Institution for Transforming India (NITI) Aayog, the premier
policy think tank of the Government of India, has been designated as the nodal
agency for leading the drive to achieve the Agenda 2030 and supervising the
implementation of SDGs both in the centre and in the states. It extensively engages
with different ministries at the central level and all state governments, apart from all
key stakeholders: civil society, think tanks and business sector. To accelerate the
process of localising of SDGs at the sub-national levels, the involvement of the
local self-government and grass-roots level functionaries in the implementation
of the SDGs is being encouraged through a host of structural, institutional and
capacity-building initiatives. To achieve the ambitious targets, NITI Aayog has
been in the forefront of articulating India’s priorities and approach towards inclu-
sive and sustainable development for all.
v
vi Foreword
This volume captures the spirit of unity that reflects India’s own development
plan and flags the blueprint for sustainable development in India, as encapsulated
with the idea of “Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas”, translated as “Collective Effort,
Inclusive Development”, which lies at the core of the Agenda 2030, i.e., “Leave No
One Behind”. This volume has identified and discussed the interlinkages within the
SDG, sectoral priorities and articulated India’s policy landscape and priorities in
convergence to SDGs, in order to achieve quality in economic growth and moving
beyond quantitative milestones. The compendium is well timed and provides
in-depth analysis of planning and monitoring to create a more sustainable economy.
It reflects India’s leadership in SDGs and scrutinises the role and responsibilities
of the multiple actors and stakeholders in the journey to achieve the Agenda 2030.
Rajiv Kumar
Vice Chairman
NITI Aayog
New Delhi, India
Acknowledgements
This volume emerges out of RIS work programme on Sustainable Development

Goals. We acknowledge with thanks the guidance and support provided by the late
Smt. Sushma Swaraj, Former Minister of External Affairs; Shri Hardeep Puri,
Minister of State (Independent Charge), Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, and
Former Chairman, RIS; Dr. Rajiv Kumar, Vice Chairman, NITI Aayog; and Mr. Yuri
Afanasiev, UN Resident Coordinator in India. We also acknowledge the encour-
agement and guidance provided by Ambassador (Dr.) Mohan Kumar, Chairman, RIS.
vii
Contents
1 Introduction: Sustainable Development Goals and India . . . . . . . . 1

Sachin Chaturvedi, T. C. James, Sabyasachi Saha and Prativa Shaw
Part I Thematic Domain

2 Sustainable Development Goals: Role of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . 17
R. S. Paroda and P. K. Joshi
3 Revisiting Industrialisation and Innovation in India:
Roadmap for SDG 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Sabyasachi Saha and Prativa Shaw
4 Health and Well-Being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
T. C. James
5 Integrated Development and Sustainable Cities:
Need for an Alternative Development Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Amitabh Kundu
6 Family Planning—A Smart Investment for India to Achieve
the Sustainable Development Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Poonam Muttreja
7 SDG 10—A Probe into the Factors Underlying Differences
in Inequality: Evidence at the Sub-national Level in India . . . . . . . 149
Rudra Prosad Roy and Saikat Sinha Roy
8 Ensure Quality Education for All in India: Prerequisite
for Achieving SDG 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Beena Pandey
9 Evolving Conceptual Framework and Monitoring Mechanism
for SDGs in India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Krishna Kumar and P. K. Anand
ix
x Contents
Part II Role of Actors and Partnership

10 The Parliament and the SDGs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Atul Kaushik
11 Role of NITI Aayog in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda . . . 239
Ashok Kumar Jain and Sundar Narayan Mishra
12 Sustainable Development Goals: Assam’s Experience
from Quantitative to Qualitative Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
V. K. Pipersenia, Rudra Mani Dubey and Supriya Khound
13 Sustainable Development Goals in India: Ambitious,
but Achievable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Pradeep Baisakh and Amitabh Behar
Part III Emerging Paradigm and Global Partnership

14 India’s Pursuit of SDGs: Unfolding Paradigm Shifts
and Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Editors and Contributors
About the Editors
Prof. Sachin Chaturvedi is Director General at the Research and Information

System for Developing Countries (RIS), an independent policy research institute,
based in New Delhi. He was a Global Justice Fellow at the MacMillan Center for
International Affairs at Yale University. He is on the board of the Reserve Bank of
India. His work chiefly focuses on issues related to development economics, largely
focussing on trade, investment and technology connect within the framework of
global governance and South-South Cooperation. He has also worked on trade and
innovation linkages with a special focus on the WTO. He has served as a Visiting
Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and has also worked as a Consultant
to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, World Bank, UN-ESCAP, UNESCO,
OECD, and many other agencies. He has authored several books, edited four books,
and published several research articles in various prestigious journals.
Prof. T. C. James is a Visiting Fellow at the Research and Information System for
Developing Countries (RIS), and President of NIPO, a non-profit Indian Intellectual
Property Foundation. He is also a Member of the Speaker’s Research Initiative and
Guest Faculty on Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) at the Indian Law Institute, New
Delhi, and Indian Academy of International Law and Diplomacy, New Delhi. He is a
former Director (IPRs) of the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of
India and Member of the Academic Council, Shekhawati University, Sikar. He has
served on Indian delegations to the WIPO and WTO and has been a Consultant
(IPRs) to the FICCI and UNIDO. He has authored books and chapters in books on IP
and also published many articles in several journals.
Dr. Sabyasachi Saha is an Assistant Professor at the Research and Information

System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi. He specialises in economics of
innovation, international trade and international development. In the context of the
SDGs, he has extensively worked on the scope of innovation; technology
xi
xii Editors and Contributors
facilitation and transfer; industrial development; resource mobilisation and the role
of the private sector. He obtained his Ph.D., M.Phil. and M.A. in Economics from
the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi at the Centre for International
Trade and Development (CITD). As a Ph.D. scholar he received the WIPO Prize, a
DAAD funded junior fellowship for research in Germany, and Government of India
Travel Award. Previously, he has also worked with premier academic institutions
and think tanks in India as senior member of the research staff. Recently, he
contributed as a Member of T20 Japan Task Force on Trade, Investment, and
Globalisation.
Ms. Prativa Shaw is a member of the research faculty at the Research and
Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi. Her areas of
research interest include the SDGs, innovation policy, international trade and
regional cooperation. She has published and contributed to numerous research
reports and working papers on the aforementioned themes. She has over 5 years of
research experience and has previously been associated with Ministry of Finance,
Government of India, as a Research Consultant under the Tax Administration
Reform Commission. Very recently, she was chosen for the prestigious
IDE-JETRO-IDEAS, Japan fellowship and completed her diploma in International
Studies from IDE-JETRO, Japan. She holds a Master’s degree in Economics from
the Jadavpur University, Kolkata.
Contributors
P. K. Anand Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System for
Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi, India
Pradeep Baisakh Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP), New Delhi,
India
Amitabh Behar OXFAM India, New Delhi, India
Sachin Chaturvedi Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information
System for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi, India
Rudra Mani Dubey Centre for Sustainable Developmental Goals, Assam
Administrative Staff College, Khanapara, Guwahati, India
Ashok Kumar Jain Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of
Telangana and Former Adviser (SDGs), NITI Aayog, New Delhi, India
T. C. James Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System for
Developing Countries, New Delhi, India
P. K. Joshi International Food Policy Research Institute, New Delhi, India
Atul Kaushik New Delhi, India
Editors and Contributors xiii
Supriya Khound Centre for Sustainable Developmental Goals, Assam

Administrative Staff College, Khanapara, Guwahati, India
Krishna Kumar Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information
Amitabh Kundu Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information
Sundar Narayan Mishra Consultant (SDGs), NITI Aayog, New Delhi, India
Poonam Muttreja Population Foundation of India, New Delhi, India
Beena Pandey Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System
for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi, India
R. S. Paroda Trust for Advancement of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi, India
V. K. Pipersenia Assam Power Distribution Company Limited, Bijuli Bhawan,
Panbazar, Guwahati, India
Rudra Prosad Roy Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, Kolkata,
India
Sabyasachi Saha Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information
Prativa Shaw Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System
for Developing Countries (RIS), New Delhi, India
Saikat Sinha Roy Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
Chapter 1
Introduction: Sustainable Development
Goals and India
Abstract The concept of sustainable development finds echo in the writings of

early economists like Malthus when he talks about depletion of natural resources.
The United Nations has been seized of the idea at least since the Human
Development Conference held in Stockholm in 1972. The Introduction presents a
brief history of the concept of sustainable development and the evolution of
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It expounds how the concept gels with
India’s own development policies and commitments and India’s development
paradigm shifted from quantity to quality in its efforts to achieve the SDGs, which
is the focus of the volume. Introduction also contains a brief overview of all the
other chapters.
The concept of ‘sustainability’ has been built in as a paradigm to measure devel-

opment with the United Nations (UN) resolution on ‘Transforming Our World: the
2030 Agenda for Development’, adopted by the UN General Assembly on 25th
September 2015 in view of the increasing concerns on environmental damages
caused by the existing development pattern. The roots of the issue, however, go
back to the times when human beings started settlements and resorted to agriculture
as a means for ensuring sustainable supply of grains at these habitats. While
agriculture was using biological resources in large scale, it also generated plenty of
such resources. With the industrial revolution use of fossil fuel increased enor-
mously and consequential generation of carbon gas, over the time environmental
damages were becoming visible. Increase in human population and competing
economies were leading to depletion of natural resources at a faster pace than
replacement. Thomas Robert Malthus had addressed the repercussions of depletion
of resources in his famous work, An Essay on the Principle of Population as It
S. Chaturvedi T. C. James (&) S. Saha P. Shaw

Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System for Developing Countries
(RIS), Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, India
e-mail: tcjames@ris.org.in
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 1

S. Chaturvedi et al. (eds.), 2030 Agenda and India: Moving from Quantity
to Quality, South Asia Economic and Policy Studies,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_1
2 S. Chaturvedi et al.
Affects the Future Improvement of Society, published in 1798 (Malthus 1926).

Similarly, we had observed1 that alarms were raised on resource depletion and its
impact on mankind during the nineteenth century, when focus was on fossil fuels,
such as oil, natural gas and coal (Jevons 1866). By the late 1960s and early 1970s,
idea of progress, sustainability, growth and development started moving toward a
new direction, that of sustainable development. After the two worldwide wars,
people became aware of the possible damages on environment due to rapid pop-
ulation growth and untrammelled industrialisation resulting in, climate changes and
environmental damages.
The idea of ‘productive environment’ found mention in the United Nations
Conference on Human Development held in Stockholm in 1972. The concept of
sustainable development was developed by the World Commission on Environment
and Development set up by the United Nations in 1983. The Commission, later
known as Brundtland Commission after the name of the chairperson, Gro Harlem
Brundtland, former Prime Minister of Norway and a former Director General of
World Health Organisation, in its report ‘Our Common Future’ (1987) defined
sustainable development as ‘development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’.2
Here, the concept of ‘needs’ refers to the priorities of the vital needs of the world’s
poor. The limitation of the poor and emerging countries is the efficient utilisation of
the given technologies and resources to satiate their present and future needs.
Three decades back, the concept of ‘needs’ had obvious reference to the unmet
and vital needs of the world’s poor. Countries had limited choices for efficient
utilisation of existing technologies and resources to satiate both present and future
needs. As a result, the assessment of needs and limitations in acquiring adequate
resources significantly influenced commitments by countries on sustainable
development. This was followed by the United Nations (UN) Rio Conference on
Environment and Development (the Earth Summit) in 1992 that placed environ-
ment at the centre of all future development discourses. The Agenda 21 emerging
from this conference addressed threats of environmental degradation by suggesting
principles applicable at local, national and global levels. The outcome document
‘The Future We Want’ of the UN conference in Rio in 2012 (commonly known as
the Rio+20) reiterated the commitment to Sustainable Development and Chap. 5 of
the same document titled ‘Framework for Action and Follow up’ featured the idea
of sustainability substantially.
The 2030 Agenda was built upon the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
whose target year was 2015, but with the dimension of sustainability. Three major
aspects of sustainable development, which is in bare sense, development without
depleting natural resources, are economic development, social development and
environmental protection. It is these elements that differentiate the Sustainable
1
It was evident in the famous work by W. Stanley Jevon’s The Coal Question of 1866.
2
World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future. Chapter 2:
Towards Sustainable Development.
1 Introduction: Sustainable Development Goals and India 3
Development Goals (SDGs) from the MDGs. The SDGs have to be considered
along with the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on financing for development (AAAA)
of 2015 and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. The SDG resolution referred
to the AAAA in the words that ‘the Addis Ababa Action Agenda supports, com-
plements, and helps contextualize the 2030 Agenda’s means of implementation of
targets’. Most of the SDGs depend on ensuring life-friendly climate and environ-
ment and, therefore, climate action is interconnected with SDGs and both are
interdependent. They together account for a holistic approach to development from
the piecemeal approaches of the past including MDGs.
1 MDGs to SDGs
The United Nations member countries negotiated a global agenda on sustainable

development to be implemented during 2016–2030, as a follow up of the eight
MDGs that were conceptualised as part of the UN’s own work programme at the
start of the century, and slowly found a place in policy design in most countries
over the next 15 years. The MDGs had set quantitative targets proportional to the
burden of dire development gaps in developing and poor countries. Global effort
has been put, since 2000, to address poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary
education, empower women, reduce child mortality and improve maternal health
and ensure environmental sustainability through MDGs. Improvement in social
sector indicators globally since the beginning of the century is attributed to the
MDGs. While countries in the developing world have been selectively successful
on the MDGs, the unfinished agenda is significant. Moreover, global partnership on
collective responsibility and resource generation has paid lip service with much
heavy lifting done by the developing world even as conditions remained plagued
with historical and monumental asymmetries.
The new agenda is called ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development’ (or, in short Agenda 2030) which sets 17 sustainable
development goals (SDGs) to be mainstreamed in policy interventions in individual
countries, citizens’ initiatives and in global partnerships. To undo the follies of the
MDG era, the SDGs have been thoroughly negotiated at UN platforms and have
emerged from an inter-governmental process between 2012 and 2015. It was the
first time through MDGs that poverty took the centre stage in the global devel-
opment debate and emphasis on international cooperation to eradicate poverty.
The UN presented the MDGs in the report titled ‘Road Map towards the imple-
mentation of Millennium Development Goals’ in September 2001 without nego-
tiating with governments and stakeholders. However, SDGs Agenda ‘Transforming
our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’ is the result of more
participatory decision-making and comprehensive in terms of addressing the root
causes of the problem.
The SDGs dwarf the MDGs in their conceptual and operational dimensions and
suggest paradigm shifts of overwhelming magnitude. The advantage of the Agenda
2030, as argued, is that it sets a sharp deadline of 2030 and mandates universal
coverage and not merely quantitative milestones. The urgency cannot be exag-
gerated. Second, it embeds strong inter-linkages between development and sus-
tainability objectives. Third, it carries hitherto unprecedented weight as a
twenty-first-century ‘global compact’ to address global inequalities, resource
flows and technology transfers.
While the first set of the SDGs (1–7) may be an extension of the MDGs with a
more comprehensive mandate of mitigating developmental challenges in key sec-
tors in all their forms, the later goals could be referred to as an extension of the
MDG agenda. These, in turn, have two distinct characters. Those immediately
following the first 7 goals (8, 9 and 10) are referred to as enablers of development
covering areas like inclusiveness and jobs, infrastructure and industrialisation, and
distribution. The final set of goals under the SDGs (11–17) lays down the frame-
work for sustainability covering areas like urbanisation; consumption and pro-
duction; climate change; resources and environment; peace and justice; and means
of implementation and global partnership. The two final goals are sometimes
referred to as meta-goals as they set the preconditions for every other goal.
Path towards fulfilment of the Agenda 2030 has to be exhaustive as it needs
participation and inputs from a large set of people representing governments,
inter-governmental organisations and other stakeholders from around the world.
The process that had begun in Rio de Janeiro at the UN Conference on Environment
and Development in June 1992, had matured in the development of the MDGs; and
remarkably transformed further in the twenty-first century with the convergence of
triple processes (Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the Agenda 2030 and the Paris
Climate Accord all in 2015) triggering unprecedented national interventions
globally and pushing for meaningful global partnership in the decades to come.
2 The Path Towards ‘Convergence’ for Achieving

the SDGs
Application of MDGs led to a growing realisation that singular target-oriented

approach is seriously flawed as there are multiple externalities and interdependence
between development and sustainability parameters. The SDGs would clearly
require tectonic shift in paradigms, partnerships, norms and action as the agenda
calls for ‘transformations’. For sustainability to be a credible approach in resolving
existing conflicts between development and sustainability the cornerstones are
many, including quality of economic growth, sustainable consumption and pro-
duction, and above them all ‘equity’ both present and inter-generational. The slated
objectives of social sector development, economic progress and environmental
sustainability are intricately linked and several parameters within each of these
broad spaces have multifaceted inter-linkages and cross-domain connections.
The SDG agenda tries to incorporate some elements of these cross-domain connects
by suggesting interoperability between targets under separate goals and by
proposing similar indicators of progress for multiple targets.
However, the exercise of identifying the 17 goals and numerous underlying

targets, despite being driven through multi-stakeholder discussions at the UN has
by and large retained compartmentalised structures as opposed to thematic domains.
This has apparently led to multiplicity of targets, and an overwhelmingly large
number of proposed statistical indicators, often beyond the scope of existing sta-
tistical systems. The technical component of ascertaining inter-linkages and con-
vergence in policy approaches are currently being worked out by countries
themselves, however, the rigour is not uniform. The demands on sophistication of
such an exercise are huge and hence governments are reaching out to varied
stakeholders like the civil society organisations and the private sector industry, for
deeper understanding and knowledge and also for nested partnerships for
implementation.
Apart from the interconnections and the intertwining of the goals, another dis-
tinguishing feature of SDGs is the holistic approach to development. The silos
approach focuses on separate areas without appreciating the fact that development
is a multidimensional process, and development one sector ignoring the others
cannot be a sustainable and optimal one in the long run. For example, economic,
social and environmental aspects require to be addressed simultaneously. Without
addressing poverty, one cannot ensure quality education or health or even economic
prosperity. The SDGs have adopted a macro approach. It encompasses the 5Ps of
the new development dimensions, namely, people, planet, prosperity, peace and
partnership. Each of these dimensions is related to the others. That is why the SDGs
stress quality more than quantity. Numbers are certainly important but not every-
where and not alone. Improvement of the quality of life of all living beings and the
health of the planet as a whole is what the SDGs aim at. This qualitative
improvement is possible only through peace and partnership of all. Sustained and
all-inclusive development is what it strives for.
3 Quantity to Quality: India’s Emphasis on ‘Convergence’
As the centre of the global economy is increasingly shifting ‘south-wards’ with

increased economic heft and weight of countries like China and India, policy
choices made by these countries on sustainability would be closely watched.
Moreover, these are also among the countries that care for a disproportionately
large share of the global citizenry. Nevertheless, these countries are already pur-
suing a progressive agenda on sustainable development and are keen to lead and
shape future ideas of sustainable development and global governance. Also,
countries’ focus on the SDGs may differ depending on their national priorities.
Riding on rapid economic progress, India has fast-tracked many of its development
interventions and has enthusiastically welcomed the Agenda 2030. We are inspired
to explore the Indian context within the broader framework of the Agenda 2030 and
are convinced about the utility and timeliness of the exercise as we enter the third
year of the reference period (2016–2030).
The wholesome approach of the SDGs is in line with India’s traditions which lay
emphasis on the unity that encompasses human as well as non-human life forms
and between living forms and environment, as encapsulated by the Vedic dictum
Vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the earth is one family), that is, everything on earth form
one family. The concept of sab ka vikas (development of all) that the Government
of India is following epitomises this. India includes in its development process the
convergence of the goals and the stress on quality in the SDGs. India has
fast-tracked many of its development interventions in recent years. The economy
and society are progressing well without harming the environment. It is committed
to climate control measures as envisaged in the Paris Agreement on Climate
Change. In the social sectors, it is constitutionally bound to provide health and
education to all and guarantee gender equality. Prosperity with peace has always
been a guiding principle of India.
At the same time, India faces many unique challenges. It is a large country with
continental diversities in population and languages. There is also considerable
geographical diversity with deserts, evergreen forests and snowy mountains and is
home to great biological diversity. All these with economic backlog and the burden
of a huge population make it a challenge for India to achieve the SDGs within the
time frame envisaged. However, there have been many fruitful initiatives and
interventions in the last few years towards inclusive development. This volume is
an attempt to capture some of these efforts in the framework of the SDGs. An
underlying theme of all these programmes is convergence and quality.
The most interesting dimension of a discussion on India in this context, with or
without the Agenda 2030 in purview, would not only be the scale of India’s
challenges but also about an impressive volume of ingenuity that India nurtures.
With India’s economic emergence, which is further magnified by its size, India is
poised for its natural and due leadership in a world beyond 2030. India would be
rendered more strength for its credible actions and rational choices on inclusive and
sustainable development. It is encouraging that the Indian polity and citizenry
acknowledge the existing gaps and are strongly focused on the options and
opportunities. The key concern for India, however, as it strives for all-round and
sustainable development of a continental-size nation is apparent challenges of
moving beyond numerical notions of degree, scale and coverage towards quality
outcomes that are not only durable and sustainable but also holistic and are able to
mitigate exclusions in all their forms. The emphasis on ‘convergence’ therefore is
paramount and spontaneous.
For the task of policy planning, Government of India appointed the National
Institution for Transforming India (NITI Aayog) as the nodal agency to ensure
coordination among government departments for implementation of SDGs. NITI
Aayog has already put in significant efforts to mainstream the idea of SDGs in
India. It has developed a comprehensive mapping of goals and targets with
respective government policies (of primary and secondary importance) and that of
the nodal/subsidiary government departments and ministries. Along with proper
implementation of policies related to SDGs, it is pertinent to monitor the impact of
the policies in place. For monitoring the progress made on the path of attaining
SDGs and its targets, The Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation
(MoSPI) of Government of India is the nodal agency.
Against 17 SDGs, 169 associated targets and 244 global indicators have been
published by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group (IAEG)-SDGs of the UN
Statistical Commission. The IAEG-SDGs is the empowered apex mechanism with
the UN to produce the SDG indicator framework that could be adopted by countries
as per local priorities and relevance. In the latest framework, nine indicators are
repeated under multiple goals and therefore the effective number of individual
indicators is 232. The indicators are classified into three tiers. Tier 1 capture the
indicators which are conceptually clear with established methodology nationally
and internationally. Tier 2 refers to the indicators in which there is a standard
method internationally but the availability of data is not regularly produced by the
countries. Tier 3 indicators refer to indicators in which there are no standard
methodologies or standards/methodologies will be developed or tested. As of 13
February 2019, the tier 1 contains 101 indicators, 84 indicators are listed in tier 2
and 41 in tier 3. Additionally, there are six indicators that have multiple tiers (i.e.
different components of the indicators are classified into different tiers).
In India, efforts have been made to identify the inter-linkages among various
policy areas. Given Indian priorities and specifications, SDG indicators have been
constructed by the MoSPI. Indicators are drafted based on a nationwide partici-
patory process among all stakeholders that includes federal and state governments,
academia, think-tanks, private and public enterprises and civil society organisation
(CSOs). The MoSPI subsequently came up with National Indicator Framework
(NIF) for measuring the progress of SDGs in India. The MoSPI is also responsible
for facilitating coordination with various line Ministries and Departments along
with other relevant data source agencies for SDG indicators, and assisting capacity
development of various statistical institutions. Besides, the Ministry has helped in
assisting states and union territories (UTs) in putting the monitoring framework in
place at respective levels.
4 Layout and Scope of the Volume
In light of the above, this edited volume puts together a collection of thematic
chapters largely aligned with selected SDGs incorporated after due consideration of
their relevance for India. This volume primarily focuses on economic development,
human well-being and sustainable pathways with special attention to financial and
knowledge resources, and measurement concepts. In doing so, the volume makes a
distinction between sustainability and sustainable pathways by refraining from
dealing with broader and more direct issues of social, economic and environmental
sustainability. The choice of the themes, apart from their relevance for India, is
guided by the extent of convergence they could possibly demand among several
SDG targets cutting across multiple SDG goals. This would uncover intricacies of
systemic relationships and dilemmas in policy choices. Thus, through this volume,
an attempt has been made to explore how India’s own development priorities gel
with the SDGs.
The book consists of 14 chapters spread over three parts along with Introduction.
Part I is devoted to themes aligned with SDGs that highlight India’s preparedness
and its earlier achievements that are pre-requisites for a future sustainable growth
strategy. In continuation, Part II looks at the role of actors and the criticality of
partnerships in order to comprehend the breadth of diversities and bring to the fore
the inter-linkages for determining the tools of convergence. The role of the NITI
Aayog of the Government of India, the State Governments, the Parliament of India,
and the civil society organisations are separately explored in-depth as part of this
intellectual exercise. The Part III deals with emerging paradigm and global part-
nership within the framework of SDGs in India.
Chapter 1 ‘Sustainable Development Goals: Role of Agriculture’ by Paroda and
Joshi explores India’s agricultural challenges and their importance for achieving
SDG goals and targets. Despite rapid economic growth, India’s agriculture faces
severe threats due to technological change, climate change, and resource degra-
dation. As a result, agriculture being the major contributor to food, nutrition and
livelihood security in India becomes vulnerable. The chapter has attempted to
explore the major challenges like declining productivity in agriculture, adverse
impact of climate change, and declining farmers’ income. To accomplish SDG 2
targets for effective, sustainable and resilient agriculture, the chapter succinctly
discusses the current status of the targets related to poverty, hunger, malnourish-
ment, land degradation and climate risks and on the new approaches in agro-food
system. Further, the chapter examines the potential and effective contribution of
technology to achieve the given targets in SDGs. The chapter also identifies the
major initiatives undertaken by the Government of India and outlines the roles of
institutions, policies and various programmes which are directly or indirectly
contributing to the achievement of the SDGs. The chapter also vividly discusses the
policy recommendations to accelerate the pace of eradication of poverty, elimina-
tion of hunger, and achievement of food and nutrition security.
Chapter 3 ‘Revisiting Industrialisation and Innovation in India: Roadmap for
SDG 9’ by Saha and Shaw is inspired by the idea that industrialisation has tradi-
tionally been the key driver of structural transformation, earlier in developed
countries and later in the emerging economies. India’s emergence, on the other
hand, has been driven by knowledge-intensive services sector, and only marginally
supported through industrialisation (dominantly skill intensive). However, by glo-
bal standards India’s industrial base remains large and diversified; but has failed to
achieve global competitiveness across the board resulting in stagnation in terms of
its share in the GDP. It is observed that productivity gains have been limited to
certain sectors within the services sector and some segments of the industry and is
accompanied by rising capital intensity in both. Productivity linked decent (wage!)
employment creation has been suboptimal leading to wide disparities in the dis-
tribution of fruits of economic growth (casting doubts on the quality of economic
growth!). Structural transformation in terms of moving shares of sectoral GDP has
not been accompanied by commensurate changes in the share of employment.
Moreover, services-led economic growth could be unsustainable in the long run for
variety of reasons including over-dependence on imported industrial goods. This
could be damaging for the achievement of SDG 8 (decent work and economic
growth) in India. This chapter essentially proposes reorientation of industrialisation
in India through building knowledge capacities to take advantage of the emergence
of Industry 4.0. This is supported by the fact that India is well placed to move
beyond its static comparative advantage in terms of production of technologically
sophisticated products as reflected in rising technology intensity of India’s exports.
An interactive process of industrialisation and innovation (as encapsulated in SDG
9) would be critical for India to sustain economic growth, generate decent
employment and move up the value chain. The chapter focuses extensively on the
scope of deepening industrialisation in India and the contours of appropriate
industrial policy design that could be relevant for new technologies, sectoral
competitiveness and value addition. It presents contemporary examples, empirical
evidence and innovation system perspectives to strengthen the policy conclusions.
Chapter 4 on ‘Health and Well-being: An Assessment of Issues of Access and
Prevention’ by James, investigates how the SDG 3 and India’s own policy on
health are aligned with each other. This is done keeping in view the national and
international laws including India’s Constitutional provisions and National Health
Policy 2017. The chapter has done an evaluation of the progress that has been made
in health projects with appropriate suggestions for course corrections to achieve
successful implementation of SDG 3. To make an accurate assessment of the
process that India has to undertake for health and well-being for all by 2030, it is
important to evaluate the current status of health and disease indicators. The chapter
also emphasises on the existing and emerging challenges for achieving quality
universal healthcare. The challenges arise from the various areas that include
governance deficiency, regional imbalance, social parameters, economic develop-
ment, environmental sustainability, innovation bottlenecks and resource limitation.
Further, the chapter focuses on preventive healthcare as the best means to achieve
UHC and also issues related to access to quality healthcare at affordable price.
Achievement of quality health and well-being for all needs robust and compre-
hensive targets that can be measured and monitored. The chapter, also, pays special
attention to the status of SDG 3 at the state-level based on selected indicators and
emphasises on strengthening statistical mechanism for evaluating the targets in
health. How to leverage India’s traditional systems of medicine to achievement of
the UHC has also been elaborated. The chapter makes a special plea for conver-
gence of inter-sectoral policies and programmes for achievement of UHC.
Chapter 5 on ‘Integrated Development and Sustainable Cities: Need for an
Alternative Development Paradigm’ by Kundu, discusses the contemporary para-
digm shifts in urban development in India. The chapter deals with challenges and
opportunities of metropolitan cities globally and their preparedness to tackle the
emerging urban explosion, particularly in Asia. In the recent past, India has
experienced rapid urbanisation. The chapter draws attention to the facts and con-
cerns about shifting of global population to cities. In this context, the author draws
some attention to the dynamics of urban industrial development and its associated
risks. The chapter captures the present pattern of urbanisation in India and reflects
on how the dynamics of development has moved beyond large urban centres to
rural and rustic peripheries extended to larger hinterland, prompting rise of
countless community settlements. Also, the chapter reviews policies and pro-
grammes, with a focus on the present flagship programmes/missions, and
acknowledges the territories of worry with regards to meeting SDG 11.
Additionally, the chapter focuses on the prominence given to restructuring of urban
governance and financial institutions, strengthening of local bodies, shift in the
planning and implementation processes, and emergence of new mechanisms of
resource mobilisation for large-scale urbanisation, in an endeavour to evaluate if all
these are in congruity with the pre-requisites of SDG 11. Also, the author analyses
the UN institutional framework for operationalising the given targets, indicators and
monitoring progress in the context of SDG 11. Similar analysis is made at the
national level with evaluation of progress in order to derive the challenges and
inadequacies in the modalities. Finally, the chapter concludes with key issues along
with potential outcomes for adopting an effective system for integrated and sus-
tainable urbanisation.
Chapter 6 ‘Family Planning: A Smart Investment for India to Achieve the
Sustainable Development Goals’ by Muttreja, discusses importance of family
planning in the context of SDGs. Many health and economic indicators have
improved after the implementation of family planning. It is evident that family
planning has been popularised to meet the development aspirations of many
nations. This chapter attempts to analyse its importance in Indian context SDGs
related to health and gender. Since, SDGs are embedded in India’s development
policies and programmes; the chapter has considered the example of family plan-
ning programme and has evaluated its impact on the development indicators that
were resonating with SDG objectives. The linkages and convergence between
family planning and the SDGs, particularly goals 3 and 5, have been discussed. The
impact of family planning in improving health and demographic indicators has been
chalked out. The author has also attempted to analyse challenges and opportunities.
Further, the gender justice issue has been analysed in-depth for ensuring
socio-political and economic equality. As a signatory of the SDGs, India has both a
responsibility as well as an opportunity at hand to harness its demographic divi-
dend; therefore, an alternative approach towards sustainable development has been
presented through harnessing demographic dividend. The study also focused on the
role of family planning as a cost-effective measure for public health and a best buy
for the development of any nation. Lastly, the importance of strengthening com-
munication for behavioural change has been reported in details.
Chapter 7 ‘SDG 10__A Probe into the Factors underlying differences in
inequality: Evidence at the Sub-national Level in India’ by Roy and Roy, focuses
on the causes of rising inequality in India at the sub-national level in attaining
targets of SDG 10. In a diverse country like India, it is important to understand the
possible determinants for inequality at the more disaggregated level for formulating
a sound and appropriate policy. An analysis has been made reinforced with sup-
porting literature/evidence on possible determinants of consumption and income
inequality. For analysis, the authors have done regression analysis with data from
18 major Indian States from the post-economic reform period. The study has come
up with interesting findings based on the empirical analysis understanding the
impact of structural transformation and trade liberalisation on rising inequality in
India. These conclusions may lead to significant policy implications.
Chapter 8 ‘Ensure Quality Education for All in India: Prerequisite for
Achieving SDG 4’ by Pandey focuses on SDG goal 4. It has presented an outline
and trends in contextualising the goal 4. It discusses major policies and interven-
tions for ensuring quality education and its inter-linkages with other goals. Special
emphasis has been given for formulation of New Education Policy and its positive
role in achieving goal 4. Thorough investigation on the education sector has been
made, and progress of important indicators, like attainments at primary, secondary
and tertiary levels in India, has been evaluated. The chapter also focuses on the
challenges and opportunities for quality education in India. Some of the major
challenges have been explored in detail at the state-level, like dropout rate, social
infrastructure and accessibility issues in education. Finally, a roadmap for India
towards achieving SDG 4 has been drawn.
Chapter 9 ‘Evolving Conceptual Framework and Monitoring Mechanism for
SDGs in India’ by Kumar and Anand analysis in details institutional mechanism
and preparedness for SDG monitoring and associated indicator framework in India.
An exhaustive detail regarding India’s institutional mechanism concerning SDGs
framework in national context has been captured, along with progress of the
national indicator framework has been assessed. The proposed indicator framework
by Ministry of Statistical and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) comprises
numerous indicators; exceeding global indicator framework. This large set of
indicators poses challenges with respect to cost for collection, processing and
dissemination of data. Whether this would lead to difficulties in analysing and
monitoring the success of SDGs in the year 2030 has been discussed. Hence, the
chapter has attempted to address bottlenecks in finalising the list of national indi-
cators, and has suggested a roadmap. It also presents some expectations from
India’s statistical system and has suggested some measures for improving admin-
istrative data collection and functioning of MoSPI. Finally, it has proposed 50
outcome-based indicators as the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) which can be
considered as the core indicator for SDGs monitoring.
The Part II of the volume opens up with the discussion on the actors and their
roles and importance for achieving SDGs in India. This section has four chapters
including the role of the Parliament and the NITI Aayog; and perspectives from
Assam as the first State to integrate SDGs in their development plans and pro-
grammes and the Civil Society Organisations.
Chapter 10 ‘The Parliament’ by Kaushik, explores primacy of roles and par-
ticipation of members of Parliament for evolution and implementation of SDG
roadmap in India. The chapter deliberates on the initiatives undertaken by the
Parliament to emphasise importance of SDGs to the parliamentarians and enhancing
their ability to coordinate in the implementation of SDGs at all levels, including at
the grassroots. To ensure inclusion of SDGs in the national development plan, the
chapter includes action for building institutional capacity and it captures on the
parliamentary committee processes to highlight issues raised before ministries and
departments of India. The author has captured innovative initiatives by the
Parliament, like the formation of Speaker’s Research Initiative, to deepen the dis-
course in the House. The chapter enumerates close linkages between India national
development priorities and SDGs with reference to various schemes and pro-
grammes of the Government of India.
Chapter 11 ‘Role of NITI Aayog in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda’ by
Jain and Mishra, examines complex relationship between the governance and the
socio-economic-environmental development. It focuses on the role and mandate of
the NITI Aayog to facilitate implementation of multidisciplinary development
agenda in India. The NITI Aayog being the nodal dagency has the responsibility for
creating interactive and co-operative platforms towards building coherence in the
national agenda-setting and in bringing all actors together for pursuing successfully
SDGs in India. It gives details of the required ecosystem in India for efficient and
effective implementation of Agenda 2030. Also, it argues on sensitisation and
awareness; alignment of development programmes and policies; issues related to
governance; relevance of localisation and its status; action and initiatives under-
taken at the national level and sub-national level, including achievements and
monitoring. Additionally, detailed analysis of the India’s Voluntary National
Review, State-level scenarios, SDG Index and dashboard has been discussed.
Chapter 12 ‘Sustainable Development Goals: Assam’s Experience from
Quantitative to Qualitative Development’ by Pipersenia, Dubey and Khound,
explores Assam as the first state in India in acknowledging and accepting SDGs in
its development plan. It draws the blueprint of integration process of SDGs and the
challenges confronted in the short and long run procedure. It gives in-depth analysis
of the Vision document called ‘Assam Agenda 2030: Our Dreams, Our
Commitment’ for larger vision for future, and has focused on key principles and
orientation in the budget and economic survey. Further, the timeframe for the SDG
implementation at grassroots level has been discussed. Role of other actors (like
Legislature and Judiciary) and their role in the implementation process for locali-
sation of SDGs in Assam is the crux of the chapter. The experience of Assam can
set an example for others in terms of how efficiently the resources can be mobilised
for channelizing SDGs at ground level. With this line of thought, the chapter draws
attention in developing partnership and creating co-operative platform at the local
level for achieving SDGs.
The last chapter of Part II ‘Sustainable Development Goals in India: ambitious,
but achievable’ by Baisakh and Behar, deliberates on the role of Civil Society
Organisations (CSOs) in the implementation of SDGs in India. In this critical
evaluation of the Agenda 2030 has been done and has highlighted striking features
of the SDGs. This chapter throws light on the most vulnerable groups’ need and
their significance to the society for achieving the goal of inclusive and equitable
growth for all and also checks on deliverability of the motto of Sabka Saath Sabka
Vikash (no one left behind). This also captures on the status of the implementation,
and has critically evaluated actions of the government. It draws on the role of CSOs
and their current initiatives during the last three years. Concrete actions at the
ground level are listed so that others draw lessons from them.
Part III builds on Parts I and II to develop a coherent narrative on the current
paradigm shift that evident in India’s policy landscape and priorities that could
define India’s approach on the SDGs in the near future. The thesis of this chapter
revolves around quality of economic growth in terms of moving beyond quanti-
tative milestones and ensuring lesser carbon footprint of economic growth;
embedding inclusive development in the spirit of ‘Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas’ and
achieving convergence of development priorities to take care of multidimension-
ality. Additionally, the chapter evaluates the scope for monitoring the SDGs and
India’s global and regional role through partnership for global public goods.
References
Jevons, W. S. (1866). The Coal Question: An inquiry concerning the progress of the nation, and
the probable exhaustion of our coal-mines (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan. Available: http://
www.econlib.org/library/YPDBooks/Jevons/jvnCQ1.html.
Malthus, T. R. (1926). First essay on population. (An essay on the principle of population as it
affects the future improvement of society, with remarks on the speculations of Mr Godwin, M.
Condorcet, and other writers, 1798). London: Macmillan (1926 edition with notes by James
Bonar).
Part I
Thematic Domain
Chapter 2
Sustainable Development Goals: Role
of Agriculture
R. S. Paroda and P. K. Joshi
Abstract Irrespective of high economic growth the agriculture sector in India is at

high risk due to various reasons. Agriculture is the major provider of livelihood for
the poor, especially in rural areas. With the increasing vulnerability, the major
challenges of the policymakers are to develop strategies to promote sustainable
agriculture for achieving SDGs. In this context, there is urgent need to ensure
reorientation of ongoing efforts toward higher efficiency and effectiveness of var-
ious initiatives for drawing a roadmap and develop a well-established sustainable
model, which can also be shared with other developing countries. Thus, the chapter
makes an attempt to analyze the causes of poverty and malnutrition and explores the
use of technologies to overcome the productivity issues in agriculture. It captures
various challenges and prospects for effective, sustainable and resilient agriculture.
It also discusses issues relating to climate change and suggests ways to mitigate the
same, particularly through the use of technologies. Lastly, the chapter assesses the
role of various programs, policies and institutions in moving forward to achieve
the targets of SDGs in India and makes specific recommendations.
Keywords Food security Land reforms Water management Sustainable

agriculture
This paper has heavily drawn from Paroda and Joshi (2017). Re-used here with permission from
the copyright owner.
R. S. Paroda (&)
Trust for Advancement of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi, India
P. K. Joshi
International Food Policy Research Institute, New Delhi, India

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_2
18 R. S. Paroda and P. K. Joshi
1 Introduction
Globally, poverty and hunger are twin challenges before human civilization, despite
specific temporal and spatial efforts. Although extreme poverty has been reduced by
more than half since 1992, still more than one billion people live on less than $1 a
day. And roughly, half of the world’s population lives below $2.50 a day. Besides,
one in every nine persons is undernourished. Among children below five years,
nearly 3.1 million (nearly 45% of total) die every year due to poor nutrition. In fact,
every 3.5 s a child dies because of poverty. Therefore, it is necessary to produce
affordable, nutritive, safe and healthy food more efficiently and sustainably.
Agriculture is a major contributor to food, nutrition and livelihood security in India,
but it is affected by numerous factors, including technology penetration, natural
resource management, climate change, policies and institutions. Today, agriculture
faces a bigger threat than ever before due to degradation of natural resources,
especially land and water, and climate change. Therefore, combating the threat of
land degradation and climate change, without compromising on economic devel-
opment, would require a new set of farm policies, technologies and institutional
reforms.
Recently, the global leaders had a retrospect on the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) to find progress on their accomplishment. It was a unique joint effort
by leaders of different countries on combating poverty, hunger, undernourishment
and other global issues. It is a matter of satisfaction that most of the developing
countries have made substantial efforts in achieving various goals, especially
poverty. Most of the countries had achieved the goal of poverty reduction by half
between 1990 and 2010, although the decline in poverty was uneven across
countries. In 1990–92, the number of poor people in Asia was about 740 million,
which declined to 565 million in 2010–12. China has done remarkably well, where
poverty declined from 60% in 1990 to less than 10% in 2008. Other East-Asian and
Pacific countries have also done quite well.
Within Asia, the largest concentration of poor is in South Asia, which houses
nearly 304 million poor. In South Asia, India is the hub of poor and food-insecure
population. As high as 71% of the poor in South Asia, live in India. Like other
countries, India could accomplish most of the MDGs well before 2015, but the pace
has been too slow as compared to China and many countries in South East Asia.
Also, the progress in some of the development goals has been rather inconsistent.
The official estimates reveal that while India achieved the target of poverty
reduction, it fell short in reducing hunger.
To continue the global collective efforts more vigorously, the countries adopted
as post-2015 agenda, a renewed set of goals to end poverty and protect the planet
and ensure prosperity for all as part of new Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs). The resolution adopted by the United Nations (UN) has a much broader
intergovernmental agreement which, while acting as the Post-2015 Development
Agenda, builds on the Resolution, popularly known as “The Future We Want”.
There are 17 aspirational “Global Goals” with 169 targets under SDGs. Among
2 Sustainable Development Goals: Role of Agriculture 19
these, the goals having direct relevance to agriculture are: ‘No Poverty’, ‘Zero
Hunger’, and ‘Climate Action’, besides the one related to ‘Life on Land’.
Global food system is becoming increasingly vulnerable and a new approach in
agri-food system is needed to achieve multiple SDGs. The new agri-food system
should be productive and efficient, inclusive, environmentally sustainable and
climate-smart, nutrition and health-driven and business-friendly. The key chal-
lenges in reshaping agri-food system are (i) prevalence of hunger and malnutrition,
(ii) rapid urbanization, (iii) persistence of poverty, (iv) impact of climate change on
agriculture and (v) land degradation. More importantly, for each of these changes
require (a) investment in agriculture to produce more food and nutrition with less
inputs, (b) support technologies that promote diversification of food production,
(c) advance frontiers for nutrition-driven technologies, (d) encourage policy chan-
ges to reshape agriculture, (e) strengthen rural-urban linkages that will help propel
economic development, food security, and nutrition status, (f) increase public
investment in health, education, infrastructural development like roads, markets,
etc., (g) promote sustainable intensification technologies and practices, and
(h) promote good governance of natural resources. Agriculture-led growth is the
key for pro-poor growth because agriculture enhances poverty reduction by raising
farm incomes, generating employment, stimulating non-farm economy, and push-
ing down prices of staple foods.
In India, agriculture is the major provider of livelihood for the poor, especially in
the rural areas. However, the agriculture sector is facing big challenges like the
declining size of land holdings, deteriorating natural resources (especially soil and
water), adverse impact of climate change, declining factor productivity, rising input
costs, fluctuating markets and declining farm income. All these factors make
agriculture more riskier. The questions that arise are: How can agriculture con-
tribute towards achieving SDGs? What should be the strategy to promote agri-
culture for achieving SDGs? What lessons other developing countries, especially in
South Asia, can learn from India or vice versa?
The Government of India gives high priority to the agriculture sector and plans
to make it more efficient, competitive, sustainable and resilient. ‘Doubling Farmers’
Income by 2022 is the latest policy initiative of the government. The other pro-
grams that aim to increase farmers’ income, conserve soil and water resources,
improve resilience and reduce risks include Prime Minister Irrigation Program,
Prime Minister Agricultural Insurance Scheme, National Food Security Mission,
National Horticulture Mission, National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture,
National Agricultural Development Plans, National Livestock Mission, etc. There
are initiatives to connect farmers with remunerative markets through e-NAM (One
Nation-One Market) and consolidate farmers to derive benefits of
economies-of-scale through Farmer Producer Organizations/Companies. All these
efforts demonstrate India’s commitment to accomplish the SDGs related to agri-
culture. There is, however, an urgent need to ensure reorientation of on-going
efforts towards higher efficiency and effectiveness of various initiatives by devel-
oping a Road Map by which we may be able to achieve the goals well before 2030.
This paper is an attempt in this direction.
More specifically, the objectives are: (i) document the status of poverty, hunger,
malnourishment, natural resource degradation and climate risks; (ii) explore the
potential of improved technologies (including varieties/hybrids and efficient man-
agement practices, farm mechanization, etc.) to achieve SDGs; (iii) assess the role
of various programs, policies and institutions that have direct and/or indirect
bearing on achieving one or more SDGs.
2 Status of Development Goals
2.1 Poverty and Food Security
The all-India Poverty Head Count Ratio (PHCR) was expected to be 23.9% in
2015, which used to be 47.8% in 1990 (Rangarajan and Dev 2014). The PHCR was
21.9% in 2011–12, which shows that India has achieved the MDGs target well
ahead of time. A World Bank study also shows that poverty declined by 1.36%
points per annum in post-1991 period compared to that of 0.44% points per annum
prior to 1991 period. Also, within the post-reform period, poverty declined faster in
2000s than in the 1990s. The annual decline in poverty ratio at all-India level was of
0.74% points during 1993–94 to 2004–05 which increased to 2.18% points during
2004–05 to 2011–12.
The key factors that helped in a higher decline in poverty during 2004–05 to 2011–
12 included: (i) a higher economic growth of 7–8% per annum, (ii) agricultural growth
of around 4% per annum, (iii) increase in rural non-farm employment from 23.7% in
1999–2000 to 35.9% in 2011–12, (iv) high growth in agriculture and rural real wages,
and (v) launch of several social protection programs like Mahatma Gandhi National
Rural Employment Gurantee Act (MGNREGA), 2015. There are projections, if the
recent trends continue, India would be able to achieve the SDG on poverty by 2030
based on both global ($1.25 earlier or $1.90 now) and national poverty lines.
2.2 Hunger and Nutrition
Hunger has three major dimensions: (i) calorie deprivation which is due to less
energy consumption, (ii) protein deprivation which is due to inadequate con-
sumption of protein-supplying food commodities like pulses, milk, eggs, fish and
meat, and (iii) hidden hunger which is caused by the deficiency of micronutrients
such as iron, zinc, iodine, vitamin A and vitamin B12 (Rampal 2018). India has a
considerable number of people having these deficiencies. Therefore, achieving
‘Zero Hunger’ by 2030 is a big challenge for India.
In the 1990s and till mid-2000s, the progress in reduction of stunting, under-
weight and wasting was ‘slow’. The stunting rate in children below three years
declined from 53% in 1992–93 to 48% in 2005–06 and further to 38% in 2015–16.
This decline in stunting rate could be due to expansion, launch, and reforms in
several programs such as Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), launch of
National Rural Health Mission (NRHM), MGNREGA, Maharashtra Nutrition
Mission, reforms in Public Distribution System (PDS) in several states, etc. The
high economic and agricultural growth rates have also contributed in improving
nutritional outcomes in the country (Das et al. 2018).
Despite achieving considerable progress, 48 million out of 159 million stunted
children of the world are from India (about 30%). In order to achieve SDG on
hunger and malnutrition, India will have to make concerted efforts on agricultural
linkages, women empowerment, healthcare, sanitation, drinking water, nutrition
awareness and education by adopting a convergence approach (Rampal 2018; Das
et al. 2018). Therefore, to achieve the SDG on zero hunger, there is a need to:
(i) improve economic and physical access to diverse nutrient-rich foods through
biofortification and adopting nutrition-sensitive food processing, (ii) leverage the
existing platforms, for example Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana (RKVY), National
Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM), National Horticulture Mission (NHM), etc.,
and (iii) empower women in agriculture by ensuring land and property rights to
them and formation of women’s cooperatives/self-help groups for improving
convergence of health, nutrition, agriculture, and other social sector initiatives.
2.3 Land Degradation
Land degradation refers to a temporary or permanent decline in ecosystem function

and productivity capacity; deterioration of soil health by affecting the associated
biodiversity, natural ecological processes and ecosystem resilience; reduction or
loss of biological/economic productivity and complexity of croplands, pastures,
woodland, forests, etc. In 2009, the extent of degraded lands in India under different
categories was 120.72 Mha, comprising lands degraded by water erosion,
82.57 Mha; wind erosion, 12.40 Mha; salt-affected soils, 6.74 Mha, acid soils,
17.94 Mha; and others, 1.07 Mha. About 64 Mha area of cropland is affected by
land degradation (Singh 2017).
Land degradation adversely affects crop production and deteriorates the pro-
duction potential of existing fertile lands. The increasing degradation intensity is
intensifying desertification in western Rajasthan, polluting coastal areas (441
thousand hectares in West Bengal and 147 thousand hectares in Odisha), and is
intensifying degradation in the eastern region of India comprising the states of Bihar,
Jharkhand, Odisha and West Bengal. Due to land degradation, arsenic and fluoride
contamination is increasing, particularly in West Bengal, and coconut-based farming
has become uneconomical in Kerala (Singh 2017). The long-term impact of land
degradation is viewed as the major obstacle of achieving SDG 1 and 2.
To control land degradation, the first step is to develop and regularly monitor the
Land Resource Inventory on 1:1000 scale, which would help to implement
situation-specific intervention for scientific land use planning. Some other measures
to control land degradation at site-specific level are: (i) increasing fertilizer- and
nutrient-use efficiency on mega-scale in different agro-ecoregions of the country,
(ii) development of protocols for non-destructive method of soil analysis, (iii) ef-
fective implementation of Soil Health Card Program based on testing of individual
plot soil by sensor-based technology, and (iv) identification of ‘prime land’—best
soils for high response—which is estimated to be 58.8 Mha constituting 32.1 Mha
irrigated and 26.7 Mha rainfed agricultural land (Singh 2017; Wani et al. 2016).
Developing location and/or situation-specific recommendations include:
(i) boosting of rainfed agriculture through a scientific soil conservation plan,
(ii) improving water harvesting potential under different rainfall scenarios, and
developing micro-watersheds, and (iii) optimizing land use plans for different
eco-regions through knowledge-based technology application for arresting/
reversing land degradation (Wani et al. 2016).
2.4 Climate Risks and Agriculture
In India, agriculture is one of the most vulnerable sectors to climate change. The
impact of climate change on Indian agriculture is clearly visible as eight out of past
15 years had been drought-affected years; and in recent years, especially 2014 and
2015 experienced simultaneous occurrence of droughts and floods. The episodes of
heatwave and hailstorms are increasing, and water shortage is being experienced
both for human and livestock. The precipitation during seasonal monsoon is
decreasing; it was deficit by 12% in 2014 and 14% in 2015 at all-India level
(Srinivasrao 2018; Pathak et al. 2012).
The empirical evidence on district-level vulnerability of Indian agriculture to
climate change has revealed that most districts along the eastern and western coasts,
and the North-eastern states are less vulnerable, but by mid-century (2021–2050),
several districts in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra,
Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar may experience
greater vulnerability (Srinivasrao 2018).
The projected maximum changes in temperature and rainfall in India are 1.3 °C
and 7% by 2035, 2.5 °C and 26% by 2065 and 3.5 °C and 27% by 2100,
respectively. The projected changes in crop yields during maximum changes in
temperature and rainfall reveal a decline in yield of all major crops in the range of
1–10% by 2035, 3–18% by 2065 and 4–26% by 2100 (Pathak et al. 2012).
For meeting climate risks, several actions have been taken. These include
implementation of technology package, comprising in situ moisture conservation,
land treatments, farm ponds, drought-tolerant cultivar, and soil-test based nutrients
application. The other actions include are: launch of institutions like Village
Climate Risk Management Committee (VCRMC), seed bank, custom-hiring of
farm machines, water users’ groups, etc. The observed impacts of these measures
were: resilience in adaptation to droughts, enhancement in household food and
livelihood security; a positive village carbon balance, and reduced GHG emission.
The adoption of conservation agriculture technologies (such as zero tillage,

direct-seeded rice, laser land levelling, etc.) have potential to minimize the risk of
climate change, reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, and enhances carbon
sequestration. There is a greater need for awareness about suitable technologies and
their benefits in increasing yields, reducing costs and addressing the challenges of
climate change. The concept of climate-smart and climate-resilient villages in
achieving SDGs need to be promoted. The advantages are in terms of better sta-
bility in crop production, better human nutrition through diversified systems, better
integration of crop-horticulture-fodder-fishery sectors, reduction in climate risk and
cost of production and reduction of GHG emissions, carbon balance and ecosystem
services through sustainable soil, water, crop residue management (Pathak et al.
2012; Shalander et al. 2016; Wani et al. 2016).
3 Technological Options
Improved technologies have a key role to accomplish SDGs. India witnessed a

glorious past of increasing food production through sustained technological efforts
and policies. Foodgrain production in India increased from mere 82 Mt in 1960–61
to record production of 273.38 Mt in 2016–17. In this section, important tech-
nologies in terms of crop development through genetic enhancement, natural
resource management, and farm mechanization are documented.
3.1 Genetic Enhancement
Genetic enhancement to increase yields, reduce risks of biotic and abiotic stresses,
build resilience and improve nutritional levels has the potential to achieve most of
the SDGs. The promise lies in accelerated breeding of self-pollinated crops with
wider gene pool, development of high-yielding nutrient-rich hybrids in field and
vegetable crops, and promotion of biofortified crops. Genetic engineering, pheno-
typing, and tissue culture will play an important role in increasing food production
and reducing both poverty and hunger.
In India, there is a strong program in public sector research system in major food
grain crops. The research system is attempting to accelerate productivity in two of
its major food crops—wheat and rice. Towards this endeavour, several (>400)
semi-dwarf landmark varieties of wheat have been developed; the recent variety
being HD 2967 which is resistant to all the three rusts, provides yield of 6.6–6.7 t/
ha. The area covered under this variety during 2016–17 was about 8 Mha and
approximate value of additional wheat yield is computed to be Rupees 40 billion/
year. For rice, high-yielding varieties are being combined with short-duration
varieties of Basmati rice.
Attempts are being made to develop and deploy hybrids of rice, maize, pearl
millet, sorghum, pigeon pea, sunflower and mustard. Promising hybrids for most of
the crops have been developed. In case of rice, efforts are being made to increase
the area under released hybrids with little success; area under hybrid rice is mere
3 Mha despite significant yield advantage of almost 1 t/ha. There is also need to
learn from success of super hybrid rice in China. For maize, hybrid vigour and
uniformity have been found to be in single-cross hybrids, India has developed
single cross hybrids of maize which have productivity levels of about 6.0–7.0 t/ha.
In the case of vegetables, the hybrids have invariably shown distinct yield
advantage.
The future lies in genetically modified (GM) and bio-fortified crops. There is a
need to deploy GM crops which have proven potential around the globe. Globally,
18 million farmers in 28 countries have planted 181 Mha area with GM crops—
whereas India planted only 11.6 Mha. The GM crops policy in India is still at
crossroads. There is a need to seriously consider adoption of GM technology in
agriculture. Biofortification is a cost-effective and sustainable approach to address
malnutrition in the country. The first biofortified high-iron variety of pearl millet,
Dhanashakti, was released in 2012. Another high-iron pearl millet variety, ICMH
1201, having 75 mg/kg Fe and 40 mg/kg Zn along with 30% higher grain yield
than Dhanshakti, has also been developed. The Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR) has released more than 20 varieties of different crops with high
nutrient contents. Some of the biofortified crops that are ready or in progress
include (i) Orange flesh sweet potato (b-carotene), (ii) Wheat (Fe & Zn), (iii) Lentil
(Fe), (iv) Rice (Zn), (v) Maize (b-carotene), and (vi) Cauliflower (b-carotene).
Besides these crops, lycopene-rich tomatoes have been developed in a polyhouse of
Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI). India is also encouraging the con-
sumption of soybean as food crops, rich in protein of very good quality, which is
also the cheapest source of protein (Gupta 2017).
The challenge ahead is to reprioritize research agenda around farming systems,
with limited research resources, with an aim to achieve the SDGs. Rather than
thinly spreading resources, research system may target unfavourable areas as well
as unprivileged social groups.
3.2 Natural Resource Management
Sustainable management of natural resources has huge potential for contributing

towards SDGs. In this endeavour, efforts are being made on land and water manage-
ment, adoption of good agricultural practices, agricultural diversification, promotion
of kitchen gardening, women empowerment, and strengthening of collective actions.
Water management: Watershed development is the most appropriate measure to
harvest, conserve and utilize rainwater for crop production. Earlier studies on
watershed program have shown several benefits, including economic, social and
environmental. Due to watershed interventions, in most of the cases, the
groundwater level has increased base flow continued for more number of days and
water for domestic/livestock use became available throughout the year. Another
aspect of water management is spread of field-based technologies like contour
cultivation, broadbed and furrow, conservation agriculture, field bunds and vege-
tative bunds. Most significant are use of micro-irrigation, drip or sprinkler, which
reduced water application, improved water use efficiency and increased crop pro-
ductivity (Paroda and Joshi 2017).
Land management: It is important aspect of natural resource management
because one-third to one-half of the earths’ agricultural land has degraded due to
water erosion, gully erosion, wind erosion, etc. There is a widespread deficiency of
micronutrients in farmers’ fields across India. For improving soil health and land
productivity, an effective measure is organic carbon building which may be
achieved through in situ generation of organic matter and recycling of farm and
animal residues. Another measure is adoption of good agricultural practices which
has raised the productivity of several crops—groundnut, 48%; finger millet, 45%;
pigeon pea, 75%; paddy 35% (Shalander et al. 2016; Wani et al. 2016).
Scaling innovations: Some large-scale programs to improve land and water
management have been launched in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. These include
Bhoochetana (Andhra Pradesh), Rythu Kosan (Andhra Pradesh), Bhoosamrudhi
(Karnataka). The overall aim of these initiatives is to increase farmers’ income
through skill development, public-private partnerships, science-led development
and collective action through farmers’ organizations, producers’ groups, self-help
groups, etc. The Bhoochetana initiative has benefitted 4.75 million farmers,
increased crop yield by 20–66%, contributed to agricultural growth of 5% per
annum since 2009 with benefit–cost ratio of 3.14:1 for the farmers in Karnataka
(Wani et al. 2016). The other initiative, Rythu Kosam, through its modus operandi
of skill development, value chain approach, public-private partnerships and col-
lective action through Farmers’ Producers Organizations, has been able to raise the
gross state domestic product (GSDP) by 10.99% in 2015–16 in Andhra Pradesh.
3.3 Farm Mechanization
The number of agricultural workers is showing a declining trend, from 263 million in
2010–11, the projected numbers are 230 million by 2020 and 202 million by 2050.
The shortage of agricultural labour is raising wages and triggering farm mechanization
in the country. The adoption of farm mechanization can provide improved input-use
efficiency, enhanced cropping intensity, reduced cost of production, and less drudgery
for agricultural workers, especially women. An overview of different farm equipment
being used in India across the agricultural value chain, from land preparation to
harvesting, accelerated the developments in farm mechanization. Some examples are:
(i) Zero till drill and its variants, strip till drill, roto till drill and slit till drill can provide
a saving of 40–70% in time and 50–70% in fuel. (ii) Happy Turbo seeder is suitable for
sowing under heavy residue condition and can control burning of rice residue after
combine harvesting. It provides saving of 78% in time, 68% in fuel, 77% in labour and
72% in cost of operation. (iii) Eight-row rice transplanter is a tractor operated
equipment with a capacity of 0.24 ha/h and field efficiency of 58–63%.
(iv) Multi-purpose equipment for sugarcane is a tractor operated implement, used for
planting of sugarcane setts (0.2 ha/h), facilitates inter-culture (0.8 ha/h), and earthing
up operations (0.4 ha/h). (v) Variable rate urea applicator can apply urea @ 18.5–
65.0 kg/ha and requires an android smartphone with GPS for operation.
(vi) Harvesting and threshing equipment include tractor-operated reaper binder, flail
type fodder harvester-cum-chaffer, tractor-mounted root crop
harvester-cum-elevator, and self-propelled rice combine (Malhotra 2017).
To promote farm mechanization, the Government of India launched a National
Mission on Farm Mechanization. The aim of the mission is to increase the access of
small and marginal farmers to farm mechanization offsetting the adverse ‘econo-
mies of scale’ and ‘higher cost of ownership’ of high-value farm equipment by
promoting ‘custom hiring’ for agricultural machinery by creating hubs for such
equipment. To promote farm mechanization, there is critical need for public-private
partnership both for research and development. In future, agriculture will be
dominated by precision and conservation agriculture. Therefore, there is a need to
develop equipment, which is suitable for small landholdings and horticultural crops
in hilly areas, and cost-effective technologies like smart tractors, unmanned aerial
vehicles and wireless technology.
4 Policy Options
In this section, the role of policies in achieving SDGs is outlined in terms of

Government initiatives on social protection programs, investments, subsidies and
enhancing farmers’ income. There are:
4.1 Role of Social Safety Net Programs
To provide food, nutrition and livelihood security, the Government of India has
been launching from time-to-time different social programs in the country; these
include: Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme-2007 (for poor elderly),
Indira Gandhi National Widow Pension Scheme-2009 (for poor widow), Indira
Gandhi National Disability Pension Scheme-2009 (for disabled), Swavalamban-
2010 (merged with APY-2015), Atal Pension Yojna (APY)-2015, Janani Suraksha
Yojna (JSY)-2005 (maternity benefits), and Annapurna-2000 (food security)
(Deshpande 2017).
The employment-based programs, (which directly address SDGs 1, 2, 8 and 10),
include Sampoorna Grameen Rojgar Yojna (SGRY) (merged with MGNREGA),
National Rural Employment Guarantee Act-2001 (changed as MGNREGA),
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)-2006,

Swaranjyanti Gram Swarozgar Yojna (SGSY)-1999 (subsidized rural credit for
employment), and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojna-2014 (to
support traditional art, handicraft, etc.).
The food security programs, which focus SDG 1 and 2, include provision of
subsidized food through (i) Public Distribution System (PDS) (wheat, rice, coarse
cereals), (ii) mid-day meal program-1995 (mid-day meal for school children), and
(iii) provision of ready-to-eat food through schemes like Amma kitchen, Anna thali,
etc. There are some health care schemes which include Rashtriya Swasthya Bima
Yojna and RSSY-2008, and Central Government Health Scheme for government
employees (CGHS)-1954. There are few schemes which cover risks. These include
Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojna, Pradhan Mantri Jeewan Jyoti Bima Yojna-
2015, Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojna-2014, and Livestock Insurance
Scheme-2008 (Deshpande 2017).
The implementation of various safety net programs face problems like failure to
reach the targets due to semi-permeability of society, uncoordinated and duplicated
efforts, poor operational efficiency, efforts falling short of demands, etc.
4.2 Targeting Less Favoured Regions
India is a large country with several states and public investments and input subsidies
vary from time-to-time and across the state. For example, a relatively higher public
investment was made in the northern and southern states during the 1960s and a
significant increase (>6% per annum during 2000–2014) was seen in both public
investment (irrigation) and input subsidies from 2002–2003. A comprehensive
analysis on the public expenditure at disaggregate state level in India, included the
economic and social activities, viz. roads-transport, education, health-nutrition,
energy, irrigation, and agricultural R&D; and four subsidies—irrigation, power,
fertilizer and credit (interest), and well irrigation (private investment) for analysis. The
analysis revealed that spending on private irrigation and power subsidy hold more
importance in less-favoured areas. Spending on agricultural research and develop-
ment, health and education have high potential to accelerate agricultural growth and
poverty reduction in less-favoured areas. Similarly, land productivity, non-farm
employment and agriculture prices have a significant impact on poverty reduction.
A small trade-off is observed between productivity and poverty reduction from
public spending and subsidies within each group of states. It is recommended that
there is a strong need for location-specific public expenditure policy (Bathla et al.
2017). The policy challenge is whether to focus on rationalization or reduction of
input subsidies because investment contributes to growth, but subsidies do incen-
tivise farmers. There is a need to revisit the investment strategy that has benefited a
few better-off regions but not much so in less-favoured states and regions.
4.3 Enhancing Farmers’ Income
The main aim is to enhance farmers’ income and empower them to achieve SDGs.
A study on pathways for increasing farmers’ income in India, revealed that mar-
ginal farmers who comprise 70% of the total farmers and have annual per capita
income of less than Rupees 15,000, should be at the forefront of development
strategies. Since approximately 80% of the low-income marginal farmers are
concentrated in eastern (58%) and western (21%) regions, the regions which have
been lagging behind in agriculture and economic development, should be given
high priority for income-enhancing strategy and initiatives (Birthal et al. 2017).
In view of limited scope for income growth through area expansion, which
stagnates at around 140 Mha, the focus now should be on raising cropping inten-
sity, reducing inefficiency in production, diversifying production portfolio towards
high-value agriculture and enhancing water-use efficiency. The rapid growth in
demand for high-value food commodities, including animal products is an oppor-
tunity for the farmers to diversify their production portfolio and capture benefits of
value addition in agriculture. The policy should provide for higher allocation of
resources to these high-value and high-growth sectors with development of inclu-
sive markets and value chains. There is a distinct need to develop the livestock
sector that remains constrained by poor breeding, healthcare, extension services,
inadequate supply of feeds and fodders and less allocation of resources. The
insurance cover is also negligible in animal sector. Therefore, there is need to
develop livestock sector rather aggressively, as it will help increase farmers income
and household nutrition security.
Role of ICT is very important in augmenting farmers’ income. Therefore, we
need to enhance mobile telephone connectivity, which has been widespread across
the country, with more than 90% villages in 20 states having mobile connectivity.
The need is to bundle all types of information that farmers need in a format and
dialect that they comprehend, and link them with modern networks for faster
dissemination.
The role of non-farm sector is indeed an important pathway for raising income of
smallholder farmers and reducing excessive employment pressure on agriculture.
The expanding non-farm sector will create opportunities for investments in ancil-
lary industries related to inputs, equipment, machines, and other support services.
We also need to focus on creating complementarities among different types of
infrastructure and institutions, and the absence of any of these may restrict farmers
harnessing benefits from investment in others. For example, the benefits of better
road connectivity in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are restricted due to poor electricity
supply for agriculture sector (Birthal et al. 2017).
5 Role of Institutions
Institutions do play an important role in improving governance, optimizing resource

allocation and mobilizing key stakeholders. Four key areas are key which could
contribute towards achieving SDGs. These include (i) agricultural R&D, (ii) land
reforms, (iii) agricultural financing, and (iv) agricultural market reforms.
5.1 Implications for Agricultural R&D
Agricultural research can significantly contribute in accomplishing SDGs. India

achieved 3.97% annual compound growth rate in agricultural sector during the
period 2000–01 to 2012–13. To have sustained agricultural growth and food pro-
duction, it is necessary to develop technologies and institutions for conservation of
natural resources; innovations for better resource-use efficiency; modernization of
inputs, output markets and farm support services; and the risk and vulnerability
management (Pal 2017). Besides development of agricultural technologies, their
dissemination and uptake by producers are equally important. It is equally impor-
tant to develop agri-business sector by facilitating regulatory environment, fiscal
incentives, and manpower development. The major developments in agri-business
sector include rising share of purchased inputs, farmers’ willingness to pay for
quality and timely availability of inputs, and transformation from small
family-owned enterprises to organized national and multinational companies.
The policy imperatives include higher investments for R&D; strengthen rural
institutions and farm services; capacity building for knowledge integration and
dissemination; land, markets and trade reforms; and integrated approach for
germplasm improvement, natural resource management, and institutional
innovations.
5.2 Land Lease Reforms
Land policies do play an important role in technology adoption, investment to

create productive assets and development of land markets. Land is a state subject,
therefore, there are no uniform land lease policies across the States. These can be
grouped into three broad categories: (i) which have complete ban on leasing-out
land, (ii) which permit leasing-out only by certain categories of land-owners such as
widows, minors, defence personnel, physically/mentally handicapped, etc., and
(iii) which have no explicit ban on land leasing, but there are still some restrictive
clauses.
Recently, the Government of India developed a Model Agricultural Land Lease
Act 2016, which takes care of the interests of land owners as well as tenant farmers.
There is differential adoption of the Act across states in the country. For example,
Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand have legalised leasing out by all categories of
landowners. Madhya Pradesh has passed a bill which is pending due to more
formalities yet to be completed. Odisha has drafted a new bill which may be
introduced shortly. Telangana and Karnataka are working on drafting a bill.
Rajasthan has removed restrictive clauses on land-leasing. Haryana and
Maharashtra have taken some initiatives to amend their land tenancy laws.
Legalising land tenure will increase leasing-out of land which will increase the
size of land holdings and consequently improve both agricultural efficiency and
improvement in soil health. Many small and marginal farmers would also be
economically better off by leasing out their lands because they will have income
from wage employment and land rent. The legalization of land tenure/rent will
enable the tenant farmers to access institutional credit, disaster relief, crop insurance
and other support services, thus leading to capital investment for improving soil and
creating of productivity infrastructure.
The farmers feel that leasing-out of land should be made legal only for agricultural
and allied activities. Care should be taken that legalization of land leasing may not
result in concentration of land holdings only in few hands. Also, leasing-in of land by
women farmer groups should be encouraged. The issue of recorded vs non-recorded
and registered vs unregistered leasing-in of lands needs a very careful look.
5.3 Agricultural Financing
Financing institutions and their policies facilitate investment and technology adop-
tion, hence contribute to achieving SDGs. In India, National Bank for Agriculture and
Rural Development (NABARD) is mandated to implement programs related to
agricultural development. These programs relate to formulation of Farmers Producer
Organizations (FPOs)/self-help groups, development of agri-infrastructure, value
chain development and climate change. To cite one case, NABARD has successfully
facilitated the implementation of Watershed Development and Tribal (Wadi)
Development programs. Recently, NABARD and GDC (German Development
Corporation) have launched a unique financing product, the ‘Umbrella Program on
Natural Resources Management’ (UPNRM) with the objective of improving rural
livelihoods through community-based approach of participatory NRM-related inter-
ventions. It encourages a shift from grant-based approach to loan-based funding
support.
The programme covers core sectors like soil and water conservation, plantation
and horticulture, forestry and biodiversity conservation, farming systems manage-
ment, and climate change adaptation. It also covers supplementary areas such as
forward and backward linkages; livelihood generation activities; processing, stor-
age, marketing, supply chain; critical rural infrastructure like roads, drinking water,
minor irrigation; renewable energy; livelihood generation activities (dairy, poultry,
fisheries, etc.); and information and knowledge management.
5.4 Leveraging Agricultural Markets
The agricultural markets scenario is changing with the emergence of new markets
such as farmers’ markets, contract farming, private wholesale markets, online
retailers, etc. These markets contribute to poverty and inequality reduction by
helping the farmers in getting a better price for produce and, therefore, higher
income to farmers. These markets also help in reducing production cost through
direct farmer interface and extension. Three years ago, the Government of India
initiated electronic national agriculture market, known as e-NAM for transparent
trading to improve market efficiency. Some studies on contract farming indicate that
it influenced resources and sustainability because contracting agencies and state
influence the decisions. A study in Punjab revealed that during the last phase of
diversification attempts (2002–2007), contract farming led to less water con-
sumption on contract farms as compared to non-contract farms; and the water
consumption for paddy was 265.7 h/acre compared to only 183.9 h for basmati
paddy promoted under contract farming. Similarly, maize cultivation under contract
farming used less water (18.3 h/acre).
The other aspect of contract farming was on sustainability of resources. It was
found that reduced water consumption was due to larger area coverage under new
crops (basmati paddy and maize) and not due to adoption of any new agricultural
practice/technology. Also, the crop combination of potato and sunflower promoted
under contract farming is found more water-intensive than wheat and, therefore,
defeats the very purpose of contract farming. Other studies on contract farming
showed that farmers get higher prices and reduce the risk. For leveraging agri
markets to accomplish SDGs, following needs to be attempted: (i) introduce
reforms in APMC markets like free licensing for better competition, exclusion of
fruits and vegetables, e-payment of market fee, renotification of commission agents/
arthiyas, etc., (ii) develop more direct linkages with farmers, and (iii) integrate
farmers into value chains.
6 Climate Action: Technologies, Policies and Institutions
The impact of climate change on food production, employment generation and

farmers’ income is very well documented across the world, including India. The
frequency and intensity of climatic extremes (cyclones, floods, droughts, heavy
rains, heat wave) depict an increasing trend. The concentration of carbon dioxide
has crossed 410 ppm, and temperature has increased by about 1 °C. Under such a
scenario, this section outlines India’s preparedness to achieve SDG on climate
action (SDG13) through technologies, policies and institutions.
6.1 Climate Risks in Achieving SDGs
The rainfall distribution and its pattern is changing. For example, in 2016, even
with a normal monsoon at all-India level, 37% area had deficit rainfall while 19%
had excess rainfall. On green house gas (GHG) emission, India contributes
insignificant amount compared to China and the USA. In 2015, China topped with
28% share in GHG emissions, followed by the USA. India emitted only about 5%
of global GHGs, and Indian agriculture contributed *1% of global GHG emis-
sions. A look at historic occupation of atmospheric carbon space revealed that the
USA occupies 29%, China 10% and India only 3% carbon space. About 75%
atmospheric carbon space is occupied by the developed countries. Country-wise per
capita GHG emissions are 16.4-ton CO2 eq by the USA, 12.4-ton CO2 eq by
Russia, 7.1 ton CO2 eq by China and only 1.6 ton CO2 eq by India.
India is committed to reduce emission intensity by 32–35% by 2030 compared
to 2005 levels (Pathak et al. 2012). It has already submitted its Intended Nationally
Determined Contributions (INDC) to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC). India has launched eight National Missions on
Climate Change and most of the Indian States have submitted their State Action
Plans on Climate Change. The country is proposing to lay considerable emphasis
on renewable energy sources.
6.2 India’s Preparedness to Climate Change
India’s preparedness to mitigate climate change impact is revealed by its following

action: (i) Launch of National Mission on Sustainable Agriculture, (ii) Launch of
Soil Health Card Programme, (iii) Initiation of Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojna,
(iv) National Agro-forestry Programme, (v) National Policy for Management of
Crop Residues, (vii) Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojna, (vii) Promotion of
organic farming, (viii) Launch of National Initiative on Climate Resilient
Agriculture (NICRA) Project; (ix) Starting-up of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima
Yojna, and (x) Launch of National Adaptation Fund.
The ICAR being the premier organisation for agricultural R&D in India, is making
efforts to prepare for climate change action. It has developed greenhouse gas emission
inventory, quantified the impacts of climate change, assessed vulnerability to climate
change, identified the mitigation and adaptation options, developed contingency plans,
developed and released drought-tolerant, submergence-tolerant and salinity-tolerant
crop varieties, these also included high-protein rice varieties ‘CR Dhan 310’ and ‘Mukul
(CR Dhan 311)’; drought-tolerant varieties ‘Satyabhama’, ‘Ankit’ and ‘Sahbhagidhan;
submergence-tolerant varieties ‘Swarna’, ‘Jalamani’, etc., salinity-tolerant varieties
‘Lunishree’, ‘Luna Sankhi’, ‘Luna Suvarna’; aerobic rice varieties ‘CR Dhan 205’, ‘CR
Dhan 201’, ‘CR Dhan 202’, etc. The constraints to climate action include
non-agreement on climate policy; inaccurate estimates of GHG emissions and mitigation
potential; volatility in carbon market; and non-compliance of Green Climate Fund

(GCF) commitment.
Some policy actions for climate risk management are: (i) invest in climate-smart
technologies, (ii) exploit mitigation co-benefits of adaptation and climate change,
(iii) develop an integrated land-use policy with crop planning; and (iv) mainstream
climate education and invest in capacity building (Pathak et al. 2012).
6.3 Soil Health Cards
Fertilizers constitute an important input for agricultural production but most farmers
do not apply fertilizers in appropriate amounts largely due to lack of knowledge
about needed quantity. To educate the farmers on judicious application of fertilizers
to their individual plots, the Government of India launched an ambitious Soil
Health Card Program., whereas Gujarat initiated this program as early as 2003–04.
To find the access, adoption, impact on productivity and constraints in imple-
mentation of Soil Health Card program, a study was conducted in 16 talukas of 11
districts of Gujarat with 2014–15 as a reference year (Swain and Kalamkar 2016).
Gujarat was a pioneering state where the scheme on soil health card was laun-
ched in 2004–05. Till 2013–14, about 21.6% of the total operated area was covered
under the scheme. A study on impact of application of recommended doses of
fertilizers on crop yield (soil-test farmers) was found positive and the yield
increased by 23.7% in cotton, 39.4% in groundnut, 23.7% in maize, 44.2% in
paddy, 75% in wheat, 15.8% in bajra, 27.4% in castor, 29.5% in banana and 35.1%
in cumin (Swain and Kalamkar 2016).
The study revealed that the level of adoption of recommended doses of fertilisers
by soil test farmers was quite low due to constraints like non-availability of fer-
tilizers, non-affordability of fertilizers, difficulty in understanding the recommen-
dations on Soil Health Card, and unavailability of technical advice on method and
time of fertiliser application. The inadequate number of Soil Testing Labs and
qualified manpower was another major constraint severely affecting the quality of
service to farmers.
The program has now scaled-up at the national level and became flagship pro-
gram. There is a need to educate farmers for soil test based nutrient management so
that the program becomes a ‘demand-driven’ rather than ‘supply-driven’.
6.4 Micro-irrigation
For better management of water in agriculture sector, adoption of micro-irrigation

technologies is being propagated across the country and the government provides
subsidy for establishment of infrastructure for micro-irrigation using drip and
sprinkler technology. From the viewpoint of climate risks, a researchable question
is ‘can wide-scale adoption of micro-irrigation reduce groundwater extraction at

irrigation system level?’ To address this question, a study was conducted to find the
impact of micro-irrigation adoption on groundwater extraction at the tube-well level
in the dark zone of Gujarat state where diffusion of micro-irrigation is substantial.
The groundwater extraction has lowered the water level in tube-wells, which has
necessitated addition of more column pipes and change of pumpsets of more
HP. The study has revealed that adoption of micro-irrigation and metered water
connection alone is statistically insignificant to reduce groundwater utilization. The
adoption of micro-irrigation does not necessarily cut down groundwater use, which
is a priori expectation. However, micro-irrigation adoption with metered connection
could reduce groundwater utilization in Gujarat.
The study has suggested metering of unmetered connections to achieve the goal
of sustainable water management. Accounting of water supply should be done at
the depletion point rather than at application point.
7 Summary and Recommendations
India has been able to achieve the target of reducing poverty level (as estimated in
terms of all India Poverty Head Count Ratio) to half of 1990-level much before (in
2011–12) the compliance year 2015. Therefore, if the recent trends continue, India
would be able to achieve the SDG on poverty by 2030. The efforts towards
increasing small farmers’ productivity and income are needed to help achieve this
goal.
To achieve the SDG of Zero Hunger, India will have to meet the food demand of
projected 1.6 billion by 2030, and this indeed is a big challenge for India. But with
the launch of several social safety net programs like National Food Security Act,
strengthened public distribution system of foodgrains at subsidized rates,
ready-to-eat food offering ventures, India is expected to move forward towards
achieving SDG on hunger.
To end all forms of malnutrition by 2030, which presents a big challenge, India
is making sincere efforts towards it. The stunting rate in children under three has
declined from 53% in 1992–93 to 38% in 2015–16 due to launch of programs like
NRHM, ICDS, etc. For reducing malnutrition, it is significant to empower women,
promote gender equality, enhance women’s health, expand female education, etc.
Agriculture technology will play an important role in India’s preparedness to
achieve SDGs. Important ones are: (i) breeding of self-pollinated crops with wider
gene pool and high throughput phenotyping; (ii) development of high-yielding
nutrient-rich hybrids in field and vegetable crops; (iii) promotion of biofortified
crops, (iv) dissemination of good agronomic practices; (v) strengthening of
watershed development program; (vi) educating on carbon building, (vii) promotion
of crop diversification towards high-value crops, (ix) strengthening of agricultural
extension and information system, (x) scaling-out programs like Bhoochentna,
Rythu Kosam, Bhoosamrudhi for better yield and farm income.
India’s attempts on farm mechanization to make agriculture farmer-friendly in

terms of development of different equipment for land preparation, seeding, plant
protection and harvesting. For increasing the reach of resource-poor farmers to
high-value farm equipment, Custom Hiring Centres are being promoted. The need
for precision agriculture for better input use efficiency and conservation agriculture
for carbon sequestration is necessary for undertaking mission mode programs to
promote them.
7.1 Policies to Accomplish SDGs
India’s initiatives on policy formulations to accomplish SDGs are equally impor-

tant. These include:enactment of Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment Guarantee
Act, and National Food Security Act; launch of programs like Pradhan Mantri
Suraksha Bima Yojna; Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojna-2015, Jan Dhan Yojna-2014;
Krishi Sinchayee Yojna; Fasal Bima Yojna, Gramin Avas Yojna-2017; Housing for
All by 2022, Gramin Bhandaran Yojna; Gram Swarozgar Yojna, Gramin
Kaushalya Yojna-2014; Swasthya Bima Yojna-2008; Disabled Rehabilitation
Scheme-2003; Mid-day Meals-1995; Soil Health Card Scheme, National Mission
on Sustainable Agriculture, e-National Agricultural Market, etc.
There is a need to relook at the investment strategy that has favoured a few
States and within the States. Also, there is a strong need for location-specific public
expenditure policy. Since investment contributes to growth but subsidies incentivise
farmers, India must consider carefully whether to focus on rationalization or any
reduction of input subsidies.
On enhancing farmers’ income, there is a need for strengthening of livestock and
fisheries sector, promotion of poultry and bee-keeping, development of non-farm
sector, and exploitation of modern ICTs, particularly the mobile telephone con-
nectivity, for dissemination of agriculture-related knowledge to the farmers.
7.2 Institutions for Accomplishing SDGs
India’s preparedness on framing institutions to accomplish SDGs is critical and

challenging. Existing institutions include: development of agri-business sector,
enlargement of road network, farmers’ willingness to pay for quality and timely
availability of inputs, introduction of agricultural land leasing reforms including
framing of Model Agricultural Land Leasing, launch of Umbrella Program on
Natural Resources Management, promotion of institutions like contract farming,
AMUL model, custom hiring of costly farm equipment, introduction of reforms in
APMC markets, linking farmers to markets, promotion of retail chains, etc.
including online retailing of agricultural commodities.
7.3 Climate Action
India’s preparedness to accomplish SDG on climate action (SDG 13) is linked with
other goals. It can be through launching of different programs, institutions, policies,
and adoption of following measures: (i) voluntary pledge of 33–35% reduction in
emission intensity by 2030 vis-a-vis 2005 levels, (ii) launch of eight National
Missions on Climate Change, (iii) preparation of Action Plans on Climate Change
by most of the states in the country, (iv) development of drought-tolerant,
submergence-tolerant, salinity tolerant varieties of different crops; (v) launch of Soil
Health Card Scheme for better management of fertilizers, (vi) dissemination of
better water management technologies including micro-irrigation technologies,
(vii) dissemination of zero tillage, (viii) awareness generation on crop residue
burning impact, (ix) initiation of climate-smart village concept, (x) development of
integrated farming systems.
7.4 Recommendations
To achieve SDGs in India, the following are recommended:

Invest More in Agricultural R&D
• Advance frontiers for nutrition-driven technologies
– Breed high-yielding, high-nutrient crop varieties/hybrids
– Develop and disseminate biofortified crops
• Support technologies that promote diversification of food
• Invest in human capital and skill development
• Ensure at least 1.0% investment of agricultural GDP on agriculture research for
development (AR4D).
Improve Land Management Systems

• Legalise land leasing and disseminate NITI Aayog’s Model Agricultural Land
Leasing Act, 2016.
• Develop situation-specific land use plans for different agro-ecological regions/
sub-regions/zones/sub-zones.
• Focus on irrigation management with the aim of “per drop more crop”.
• Strengthen Soil Health Card Scheme for applying soil-test based nutrients.
• Develop geo-portal and mobile Apps for national and international connectivity.
Accelerate Climate Action

• Invest in development of climate-smart agriculture.
• Development and dissemination of drought-tolerant, submergence-tolerant,
salinity-tolerant and aerobic stress-tolerant varieties of crops.
• Promote conservation agriculture technologies. Develop institutional arrange-
ment for custom hiring services to promote especially small farm
mechanization.
• Mainstream climate and agriculture-related education.
• Develop long-term weather forecasting system.
• Crop residue burning has to be banned completely.
Reform Policies and Interventions

• Revisit investments strategy that has favoured a few better-of States and regions.
• Paradox of investment versus subsidy needs deeper thinking because it is
believed that investments contribute to growth, but subsidies incentivise only
farmers. And, therefore, whether India should focus on rationalization or
reduction of input subsidies is a big challenge?
• Ensure effective implementation of various social safety net programs.
• Develop non-farm sector to de-stress agricultural sector, income enhancement of
rural households, and check rural-urban migration.
• Promote bee-keeping, livestock, poultry, fisheries subsectors of agriculture.
• Popularise ‘Umbrella Program on Natural Resource Management’, initiated by
NABARD.
• Replicate collective initiatives like Bhoochetana, Rythu Kosam (of Andhra
Pradesh) and Bhoosamrudhi (of Karnataka) that have provided better crop yield,
and higher income.
• Evolve farmer-friendly crop insurance products.
• Initiate dialogue and have clear policy on GM crops.
Strengthen Agri-Marketing Systems

• Focus on agri-marketing and pricing issues.
• For timely trade decisions, price monitoring and forecasting of major food
commodities need to be done rather frequently.
• Develop warehousing, cold chains, food processing (preferably at production
sites).
8 Way Forward
The SDGs do present a unique opportunity for the entire agricultural sector to
get aligned for achieving a better tomorrow for the world. Currently, India has the
largest number of under-nourished and poor people in the world. Hence, if India
can accelerate the pace to achieve SDGs, then globally we could soon eliminate
hunger, achieve food security and improve household nutritional security. At the
same time, it is imperative that policy makers accord high priority to AR4D and
ensure enhanced allocations (a minimum of 1% of agricultural GDP) to National
Agricultural Research System (NARS) and strengthen the food systems for physical
and economic access to resource poor people residing in rural and urban areas. In
fact, agriculture sector is seen as an important sector to achieve faster the goals of
eliminating both poverty and hunger as well as ensure nutrition and environmental
security and protection of fast degrading natural resources. However, the success of
achieving SDG would require a Mission-Mode approach to implement and effec-
tively monitor the progress on defined goals. Strategies to accomplish SDGs must,
therefore, address the following recommendations on priority:
• Despite witnessing Green, White and Blue Revolutions, having attained
impressive food production of 275.68 million tonnes, milk production of 155
million tonnes and both inland and marine fish production of 7.0 million tonnes,
on GHI, India ranks 100 among 113 countries and prevalence of poverty is
around 24%. Despite physical access, our major aim should now be to provide
economic access to available food through effective implementation of national
food security act and other safety net initiatives, especially in the regions/states
where maximum poverty and hunger still resides.
• Ensuring meaningful engagement of all stakeholders in the formulation of
national strategies, implementation plans and monitoring of the progress
towards achieving SDGs, using baseline data for defined goals to be a national
priority.
• The functioning of (NARS), involving ICAR Institutes and the State
Agricultural Universities (SAUs), must involve other stakeholders such as
NGOs, FPOs, private sector institutions, farmers and agribusiness entrepreneurs.
• Continuous prioritization as well as re-prioritization is needed for development
research portfolio in tune with the fast-changing global, regional and national
needs. The ‘top-down’ approach adopted in the past will have to be changed to
make it a ‘bottom-up’ approach. A shift from project to program mode and also
from commodity/crop to farming system’s mode is urgently warranted. In this
context, focus on crop diversification, hybrid seeds/high-value crops, biotech-
nology, ICT, GIS and good agronomic practices (GAP) would help in doubling
farmers’ income and attain resilience in agriculture with efficient input (water,
fertilizers, chemicals for pesticides) use.
• Adopting eco-friendly and climate-resilient technologies, with emphasis on
efficient farming systems in different eco-regions and strengthening of activities
for improving soil health through organic matter recycling, conservation
agriculture, efficient and need-based use of nutrients, using decision support

systems and soil test results, improved water use efficiency using
micro-irrigation techniques etc., would help resilience in agriculture.
• Make best use of available knowledge and technologies through: (i) defining
recommendation domains (technology targeting); (ii) increased investments
(almost double) in managing efficiently land and water resources; and
(iii) strengthening input delivery as well as market linkage mechanisms.
• National Livestock Mission should focus particularly on quality feed and fod-
der, improved risk coverage including animal insurance, conservation and
improvement of indigenous breeds; higher productivity and production; value
addition; enhanced livelihood opportunities; increased awareness; and better
availability of quality animal products to the consumers at affordable price.
• Need for developing new agri-food systems for pre- and post-production
management through processing and value addition and by ensuring no wastage
of food both during storage, transportation and consumption.
• Updating farmers’ on new technologies, practices and recent advancements is a
must as against providing subsidies. Building multilateral and multi-sectoral
technology transfer mechanisms for linking science to society with greater
emphasis on attracting and retaining youth in agriculture, especially through
diversification, secondary and specialty agriculture are to be strengthened to
empower farmers.
• Dissemination of available high-value technologies; market linkages through
e-NAM, revision of APMC; provision of pledged storage; developing and
providing need-based technologies for immediate use and also for anticipatory
long-term needs of farmers/industries/consumers is now needed. We need to
remain competitive in order to take full advantage of globalisation of agriculture
and have an advance preparedness for emerging new WTO regime.
• India must increase substantially its capital investments for creating
much-needed infra-structure, available by involving both public and private
sectors, especially in the eastern and north-eastern regions to capitalise on rich
natural resources that have great potential for faster agricultural growth and
evergreen revolution.
• SDGs have several interconnected goals and, thus, require an effective coordi-
nation and convergence mechanism at all levels through an inter-disciplinary
and inter-institutional/departmental approach to draw collective strength for
desired impact. Such coordination mechanism needs to be top-down for effec-
tive monitoring and evaluation.
• Widening the policy space with much-needed faith in agricultural science and
new technologies without fear and with human face, is very much needed for
accelerating growth. Therefore, an aggressive approach on policy advocacy and
reforms is urgently warranted for scaling innovations for achieving SDGs in the
given time frame of 2030.
References
Bathla, S., Joshi, P. K., & Kumar, A. (2017). Revisiting investment and subsidies to accelerate
agricultural income and alleviate poverty in India (p. 93). IFPRI Discussion paper.
Washington, DC, USA: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Birthal, P. S., Negi, D. S., & Devesh, R. (2017). Enhancing farmers’ income: Who to target and
how? NIAP Policy Paper No 30. New Delhi, India: National Institute of Agricultural
Economics and Policy Research.
Deshpande, R. S., Hatti, N., & Jyotishi, A. (2004). Poverty in India: An institutional explanation.
18th European Conference on Modern South Asian Studies (SASNET), Lund, Sweden (6–9
July) (pdf.semanticscholar.org).
Das, M., Sharma, A., & Babu, S. C. (2018). Pathways for agriculture-to-nutrition in India:
Implications for sustainable development goals. Food Security, 10(6), 1561–1576. The science,
sociology and economics of food production and access to food. The International Society for
Plant Pathology. Springer.
Pal, S. (Eds.). (2017). Agricultural research and development policy in India: The funding,
institutions and impacts. ICAR-NIAP. New Delhi, India: National Institute of Agricultural
Economics and Policy Research.
Paroda, R. S., & Joshi, P. K. (Eds.). (2017). Proceedings of the National Conference on
Sustainable Development Goals: India’s Preparedness and the Role of Agriculture. New Delhi,
India, May 11–12, 2017. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Trust for
Advancement of Agricultural Sciences (TAAS) and International Food Policy Research
Institute (IFPRI). 48 pp.
Pathak, H., Aggarwal, P. K., & Singh S. D. (Eds.). (2012). Climate change impact, adaptation and
mitigation in agriculture: Methodology for assessment and application. New Delhi, India:
Indian Agricultural Research Institute. https://hdl.handle.net/10568/42048.
Rampal, P. (2018). An analysis of protein consumption in India through plant and animal sources.
Food and Nutrition Bulletin, 39(4), 564–580.
Rangarajan, C., & Dev Mahendra, S. (2014). Counting the poor: Measurement and other issues.
IGIDR Research Paper. Mumbai: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, 20 pp.
Shalander, K., Falk, T., & Whitbread, A. M. (2016). Pathways to sustainable intensification:
Participatory designing of adopted farming system innovations, pp. 32–35. (www.researchgate.
net/publication/306378923).
Singh, S. K. (2017). Land degradation in India: Nature, extent and severity. Paper presented in
National Conference on ‘Sustainable Development Goals: India’s Preparedness and the Role of
Agriculture’, jointly organized by TAAS, ICAR and IFPRI on 11–12 May 2017, New Delhi.
Singh, S. (2018, December). Reforming agricultural markets in India. Economic and Political
Weekly, 53(51).
Srinivasrao, C. (2018). Climate change and extreme climate events. The Andhra Agriculture
Journal, 65, 253–259.
Swain, M., & Kalamkar, S. S. (2016). Soil health card programme in Gujarat: Implementation,
impacts and impediments. AERC Report No. 162. Anand, Gujarat: Agro-economic Research
Center, Sardar Patel University, 117 pp.
Wani, S. P., Chander, G., Sahrawat, K. L., Pal, D. K., Pathak, P., Pardhasaradhi, G., & Kamadi,
P. J. (2016). Sustainable use of natural resources for crop intensification and better livelihoods
in the rainfed semi-arid tropics of central India. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Science, 78
(Sep), 13–19.
Chapter 3
Revisiting Industrialisation
and Innovation in India: Roadmap
for SDG 9
Sabyasachi Saha and Prativa Shaw
Abstract This chapter contextualises and conceptually captures industrialisation as

part of the discourse on Sustainable Development Goal 9 (SDG 9). It is evident that
there is huge divergence in the per capita manufacturing value-added between
industrialised countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) which needs to be
corrected and industrialisation should urgently adopt sustainable practices. Though
by global standards, India’s industrial base remains large and diversified; it has
failed to achieve global competitiveness across the board resulting in stagnation in
terms of its share in the GDP that negatively impacts the quality of economic
growth in terms of employment creation. The chapter proposes reorientation of
industrialisation in India through building knowledge capacities to adopt to
fast-moving industrial frontiers. Subsequently, the chapter focuses on the scope for
deepening industrialisation in India against current priorities and future needs.
Finally, it reflects on the indicator framework relevant to SDG 9 that would act as a
guide for strengthening evaluation of the progress on industrialisation in the Indian
context.
Keywords Industrialisation Industrial policy Innovation system
1 Background
International cooperation and domestic policymaking have acquired a new fulcrum

in the form of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Global inequities, devel-
opmental gaps and sustainability challenges in the face of hyper globalisation are
The authors are grateful to Professor Sachin Chaturvedi for his extensive comments on the
earlier draft of the paper. The paper has also benefitted from comments received from
Professor S. K. Mohanty. Responsibility of any error and omissions remain with the authors.
S. Saha (&) P. Shaw

Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System for Developing
Countries (RIS), Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, India
e-mail: s.saha@ris.org.in

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_3
42 S. Saha and P. Shaw
foundational to the conceptual framework of the SDGs adopted by the UN as a global

development agenda for 2016–2030. In order to sustain economic growth (and
promote inclusive development), SDGs emphasise on industrialisation and innova-
tion. Of the 17 SDGs, SDG 9 sets targets for industrialisation and innovation. The
necessary preconditions, of course, go beyond the stipulations of SDG 9 and are
covered in other SDGs. The achievement of the SDGs conceptually rests on fulfil-
ment of interconnected targets across multiples goals. Fulfilling SDG 9 is also critical
to achieving SDG 8 which seeks to place economic growth and decent employment
at the heart of the agenda of inclusive development. Together SDGs 8 and 9 are often
cited as the key enabling goals of the entire SDG compact. The motivation of SDG 9
primarily draws on the fact that there is huge divergence in the per capita manu-
facturing value-added between industrialised countries and Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) which needs to be corrected and industrialisation should urgently
switch to sustainable practices. Depending on the current levels of industrialisation,
technological innovation is expected to facilitate catching-up, reduce distance to
frontier, promote transition/leapfrogging into new age industrialisation and ensure
environmental sustainability. The SDG 9 also has a third pillar viz. infrastructure
(with a focus on sustainability and inclusivity), which demands separate attention.
India’s record of industrialisation is not poor but definitely sub-optimal when
compared to East Asian countries. India’s technology intensity of exports has also
gone up steadily accompanied by rise in real wages, more so in the decade of 2006–
20161. This suggests that India is not stuck in static comparative advantage. But
surely this is not enough to ensure adequate number of decent jobs for India’s rising
working-age population. India has to generate well-paid jobs and at the same time
sustain its growth momentum to substantially improve its per capita incomes. Low
per capita incomes in India would continue to impose constraints on market size for
certain value-added products (across categories of technology intensity) for which
exports would be considered important for generating economies of scale at the
level of the industry.
Industrialisation has traditionally been the key driver of structural transforma-
tion, earlier in developed countries and later in the emerging economies. India’s
emergence, on the other hand, has been driven by knowledge-intensive services
sector, and only marginally supported through industrialisation (dominantly skill
intensive). However, by global standards India’s industrial base remains large and
diversified; but has failed to achieve global competitiveness across the board
resulting in stagnation in terms of its share in the GDP.
It is observed that productivity gains in India have been limited to certain sectors
within the services sector and some segments of the industry; and is accompanied
by rising capital intensity in both. Productivity linked decent (wage) employment
creation has been sub-optimal leading to wide disparities in the distribution of fruits
of economic growth (casting doubts on the quality of economic growth). Structural
transformation in India has not been accompanied by commensurate changes in the
1
Mohanty and Saha (2019).
3 Revisiting Industrialisation and Innovation in India … 43
share of employment. This chapter essentially proposes reorientation of industri-

alisation in India through building knowledge capacities. This is supported by the
fact that India is well placed to move beyond its static comparative advantage
towards expanding opportunities for production of technologically sophisticated
goods as reflected in rising technology intensity of India’s exports. An interactive
process of industrialisation and innovation (as encapsulated in SDG 9) would be
critical for India to sustain economic growth, generate decent employment and
move up the value chain. This chapter focuses extensively on the scope of deep-
ening industrialisation in India and the contours of appropriate industrial policy
design that could be relevant for new technologies, sectoral competitiveness and
value addition.
India was originally inspired by the Soviet-style central planning that imparted
government with pre-eminent role in industrial production across sectors. This
involved setting up of production facilities according to sectoral priorities and
predetermined resource allocation. The second Five Year Plan closely resembled
Feldman’s model of the Soviet Union in the 1920s (promotion of heavy industries/
capital goods sector by the State) (Ray 2008). The cornerstone of such a policy
regime has been that of import substitution and preference for closed economy
norms (ceiling on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and controls on technology
import) restricting efficiency and competition. This also hindered India’s prospects
of benefitting from its natural comparative advantages in terms of labour abun-
dance. No wonder, India failed to leverage the Asian miracle in industrial growth.
The negative manifestation of such a policy regime was also evident from the
insulation provided to large manufacturing industry from external competition
through a policy regime of import substitution nature and industrial licensing
limiting the scope of new entry (Panagariya 2008). Of course, the small producers
remained protected through small-scale sector reservation policy that stopped larger
firms from producing specific products that were reserved for small firms (Mohan
2002). As reported in Kathuria et al. (2013), significant difference in productivity
between informal and formal sectors has been observed for the small and big firms
in the same industry (Kochhar et al. 2006; Mazumdar and Sarkar 2009).
The industrial sector was subjected to sporadic (internal) reforms in the 1980s.
However, the most drastic change in terms of both internal and external sector
reforms was introduced in 1991 with the launch of the new industrial policy lib-
eralising licensing regime, promoting FDI, facilitating new technology acquisition,
reducing the role of public sector and allowing sectoral reforms extending to
allowing for mergers and acquisitions.2
Such policy revision was accompanied by India’s progressively deeper inte-
gration with the world economy, which was a direct outcome of India’s proactive
participation at the Uruguay Round of WTO negotiations and subsequent to
2
The content of economic reforms, both internal and external, as well as the impact on economic
growth is a matter of intense academic discourse in India. Scholars arrive at diverse conclusions
with regard to influence of specific reforms on economic growth and the overall structural break
for the economy.
introduction of the WTO Agreement in 1995. Strengthening of Capital Markets and

Financial Institutions also positively influenced the growth of the Indian industry.
External sector engagement was facilitated through other policies like promotion of
Special Economic Zones (SEZ). India was one of the first countries in Asia to
encourage and set up the first Export Processing Zone (EPZ) in Kandla in 1965. To
overcome some of the hindrances like control and clearance; lack of infrastructure;
fiscal policy stipulations and eventually attract larger foreign investments in India,
SEZ policy was announced in April 2000 but got clearance from Parliament in 2005
and became effective from 2006.
Following the elaboration of the background in Sect. 1, in Sect. 2 we have
presented a literature review on the dynamics of technological change and its
relevance for industrialisation. Section 3 focuses on the scope for expanding the
manufacturing sector in India for the success of SDG 9 and strengthening the
national innovation system to promote research and build knowledge capital in
India. This is followed with elaboration (in Sect. 4) of the contemporary priorities
with regard to industrial policymaking, along with reference to potential future
needs that would have implications for both industrialisation and innovation in
India. Finally, in Sect. 5 we have examined the contours of the indicator framework
relevant to SDG 9. We have presented the way forward in the form of concluding
remarks in Sect. 6.
2 Technology-Induced Industrialisation:
A Review of Literature
High pace of income and productivity growth due to first and second industrial
revolutions and colonial nature of exchange resulted in accumulation of wealth in
early industrialised countries. This group of countries could multiply their incomes
at a much faster rate than others. This also altered factor endowments. The early
industrialised countries emerged as capital-rich, while many in the developing
world continued to depend on natural resources and human labour, for production
and trade. Therefore, in the recent centuries, the realities of static comparative
advantage remained largely unchanged globally with terms of trade deteriorating
for the developing countries.
Scientific discoveries driving technological progress emerged from constant
technological efforts that were largely absent beyond early industrialised countries.
Such processes would take a long time to emerge in the rest of the world with
handful of new countries gaining capabilities and skills. Technology transfer to
these countries had never been spontaneous (despite re-location of production
bases) with greater dependence on technological learning as a means to emerge.
Technological maturity played a critical role in countries with rising per capita
incomes outside early industrialised (and high income) countries. The productivity
gains (due to first waves of industrial revolution) as enjoyed by early industrialised
countries had fallen despite emergence of new vintage of technologies. The newly
industrialised countries nevertheless improved their terms of trade through a

combination of technological learning and accumulation of human capital.
Productivity gain is perhaps influenced by factors additional to shop-floor tech-
nologies and automation. First, advancement in medical science, material science
and environmental technologies has great potential in improving the intrinsic
quality of factors of production. And, secondly, cognitive abilities and skills of the
labour force or in other words human capital formation is also a key driver of
productivity gains. Therefore, to sustain economic growth and promote equity and
well being through decent jobs, a holistic strategy on industrialisation and inno-
vation is essential (OECD 2007).
It is important to understand the process of technological catch-up in developing
countries. This is elaborately articulated in the works of Sanjaya Lall and Richard
Nelson. In understanding industrialisation we arrive at interplay of factors like
demand, knowledge base, skills, technological efforts, learning, international trade,
however, with differential impact across countries and industries. Very often we
grapple with the question of policy choices on growth strategy and scope for
employment generation with regard to technology choices in developing countries.
In a situation, where globalisation is fait accompli, trade and resource flows are
market-driven, there are new dilemmas on the effectiveness of sustainable pro-
duction and consumption choices at the national level. Therefore, the choices that
are made can only cover a reduced set of issues like degree of economic reforms,
trade liberalisation and technology flows. Policies on technology choices, might,
however, need deeper understanding of how firms produce and innovate.
Production choices as well as technology choices may not follow factor prices
alone3 given that technologies respond to consumer demands—both present and
future, as well as the skill bias in the labour force (Acemoglu 2002).
Technological areas vary in terms of pace and frequency of radical innovations
with significant importance of incremental changes. As observed by UNIDO,
high-tech sectors experience radical innovations more often than medium and low
tech sectors that heavily rely on incremental and sourced innovations. Innovation
propensity also differs greatly by country, sector and period. The dominant form is
incremental, particularly in developing countries. The late entrants, in many cases,
emerged through increased exports of high-quality and sophisticated manufactured
goods notwithstanding incremental nature of underlying innovations (Puga and
Trefler 2010).
Technological opportunities of a typical developing country have been a subject
of serious academic curiosity. It is difficult to conclusively suggest whether
dependence on technology leaders located in advanced countries is absolute
necessity for countries that are catching-up. Aspects of catching-up from the per-
spectives of innovation frontiers, technology gaps and absorptive capacities have
been explored in the literature (Gerschenkron 1962; Nelson 1981; Abramovitz
3
As suggested in the concept of induced innovation by Hicks (1963) and later Samuelson (1965),
Drandakis and Phelps (1966), Nelson and Phelps (1966).
1986). As explained by Lall (1992), dominant assumption has been that developing
countries select and costlessly apply the innovations depending on the appropri-
ateness. Lall (1992) also suggests that as the general level of capital accumulation
(and skills) rises, more capital-intensive (or complex) technologies become eco-
nomical—these are also bought from the international technology shelf. Acemoglu
(2002) following the endogenous growth literature demonstrates that there is greater
possibility of technical change directed at expansion of skill base. Technology has
contributed to increased compensation for skilled labour and technical change has
definitely been skill-biased. Market size effects (and increasing returns at the level
of industry) of technical change are also very prominent (a la Romer). The general
direction of technical change as observed in developing economies in the last half
of the previous century conforms to such trends. This strand of literature prompts us
to believe that industrialisation would follow patterns of technical change that has
strong links with skills. Therefore, balancing and sequencing of technological
efforts vis-a-vis expansion of skill is a matter of policy understanding that has to be
adequately informed of country context and requirements specific to sectors.
We note that strong emphasis has evolved around the role of National Innovation
Systems (NIS) not only in furthering skills but also for creating appropriate
opportunities for innovation and technological absorption. Chances of innovation
are impaired if innovation system that connects various actors like government,
private businesses and R&D institutions are absent. It is well acknowledged that
neither technological absorption nor imitations are costless process. The implicit
and tacit components of knowledge sharing are of much importance. As pointed out
by Atkinson and Stiglitz way back in 1969, firms experience technical progress in
varying degrees dependent on their own efforts, experience and skills. They add, the
extent to which firm-level differences in technological effort and mastery occur may
vary by industry, by size of the firm or the market, by level of development or by
the character of trade/industrial strategies pursued. The activities undertaken by
firms involve skills at various levels and use of commensurate technologies across a
range of protocol like quality control, operation and maintenance extended to
adaptation, design and innovation (both product and process). Cohen and Levinthal
(1990) highlight the importance of in-house R&D as a source of innovation as well
as technological learning. Along with formal R&D, production engineering, quality
control, trouble-shooting and even shop-floor experience are considered important
sources of technical change.4 Moreover, technological capability and export per-
formance of developing country firms are to a large extent determined through
minor innovations, production engineering and reverse engineering. Behavioural
(evolutionary) approach to technological change captures channels of knowledge
spillovers, importance of R&D efforts in initiating technological learning and the
diversity in the process of discovery of technological opportunities.
4
Highlighted in Lall (1986); other relevant studies are Pavitt (1984); Dahlman and Westphal
(1982), Katz (1984) and Bell et al. (1984).
In order to promote industrialisation we need to understand in detail what pro-

duction entails. Why developing country firms are so dependent on foreign tech-
nologies. Most technologies available in today’s world are born in advanced
countries that have mature innovation systems. Rosenberg (1969) highlighted the
process of innovation as it emerged from the forces of inducement to innovate
during the first and the second industrial revolutions. It was evident that techno-
logically advanced societies had learnt to solve technological challenges with strong
faith in creativity as central to growth itself. It was also observed that widespread
innovation would not have been a response to changes in factor prices given that
such changes are very pervasive. Complex technologies cause inducement to
innovate by creating internal compulsions (within firms) for robust exploratory
activities in particular directions. As illustrated in Rosenberg (1969), the improved
designs of automobile engines led to higher speeds triggering invention of
improved braking systems. Similarly, invention of a high-quality amplifier led to
improved loudspeakers.
Industry should create a necessary impetus for economic growth as well as use
the power of technology to achieve inclusive development. Shop-floor automation
of the third industrial revolution has already evolved into fourth industrial revo-
lution (Industry 4.0) identified with integrated digital command and control sys-
tems, interactive devices, big data systems and artificial intelligence capable of
determining nature and method of production. This would profoundly change
production systems and economic activities. Command over the new technology
space would come from an evolved NIS and indigenous production capabilities.
Developing countries can expect to benefit only if deployment of new technologies
and building of innovation capacities are robust.5
3 The Dual Strategy for SDG 9 in India
3.1 Reimagining Industrialisation as the Foundation

of Future Economy in India
Emerging developing countries have experienced rapid economic growth and some
have become leading economies of the world including China and India resulting in
dislocation of the centre of gravity of the world economy. However, they continue
to remain as developing countries on account of large populations resulting in low
per capita incomes. In the context of India, despite rapid economic growth and its
evolution into a prominent economy, larger development concerns linked with
quality of economic opportunities among the workforce poses considerable policy
5
Romer (1986) famously captures the idea behind endogeneity of knowledge in growth where he
demonstrates that economy enjoys increasing returns to knowledge through collective investments
in knowledge creation.
challenge. While tradable services have been driving India’s economic growth, the
equity outcomes of a service-led economy have been questioned given the limi-
tation to generate decent jobs beyond the highly skilled category of the workforce.
India continues to have an overwhelmingly large informal sector comprising of
farm/non-farm activities including non-tradable services. Therefore, India sees
industrialisation as an opportunity to widen the base of formal non-agricultural
economic activity essential for generating mass scale decent employment; and also
rebalance the tilt in favour of services observed in recent decades. In this backdrop,
we attempt to understand India’s opportunities and challenges towards greater
manufacturing value addition, innovation and sustainable development in the spirit
of SDG 9.
The economy of the future has to be driven through skills, technology, indus-
trialisation and widespread innovation. The industrialisation process and expansion
of the modern service industry would need commensurate skill generation.
However, skills and physical capital accumulation may not automatically lead to
greater innovation outcomes (Nelson and Winter 1982). The continued emphasis on
industrialisation in larger developing economies is not meant to underestimate the
gains derived in the process of leapfrogging that has been noticed in patterns of
structural transformation in some countries including India. However, the focus on
industrialisation is rather a caution on the potential downsides of sub-optimal
industrialisation for a country of India’s size. High-income growth in India has
resulted in significant expansion of the middle class driving domestic consumption
of industrial products. This size of the middle class shall expand further with
additional strain on foreign exchange to support ever-increasing volumes of imports
(both goods and services, while trade deficit in goods is of bigger concern in the
Indian context). Fortunately, the favourable trend in expansion of the middle class
is observed across developing countries and LDCs. This offers dual opportunity to
the manufacturing industry in India to cater to the domestic market as well as new
markets (Mohanty and Saha 2019).
India’s export performance in the manufacturing sector would be based on
competitiveness and quality improvements derived from new products and pro-
cesses. This would be coupled with conformity requirements with regard to sus-
tainable production and adoption of green technologies as per global norms. With
rising per capita incomes at home, domestic consumers would be demanding better
quality products. Hence, due to both external and internal demand, the innovation
challenge for India’s manufacturing sector is real and dynamic. This effort would be
facilitated through greater innovation capacities and assured availability of technical
skills alongside procurement of such technologies from international shelves if
accessible and affordable. However, it is imperative that associated technological
learning facilitates localisation of technologies through applied R&D meant for
customisation and reverse engineering. As famously pointed out by Nelson and
Winter (1982), creation of innovation capacities would make search for solutions
easier and enhance the probability of new innovations as well as commercialisation.
Industry R&D is increasingly specialised with technology dominance of a few
leading firms in each sector. Flow of technologies happens mostly through the
multinational companies (MNCs) who have control over these technologies or can
source them from other technology firms. Countries in East Asia (e.g. Japan, South
Korea, Chinese Taipei) immensely benefitted from flow of FDI and technologies
and the stages in industrialisation and technological learning eventually lead to
frontier R&D capacities for technology leadership. While FDI facilitated integration
into GVCs (primarily in downstream activities) in some of the South East Asian
countries, due to deficiencies in institutional preparedness they could not emerge as
successful as their East Asian peers in firm-level innovation capacities. However,
China has embarked on a remarkable technology journey following the footsteps of
Japan and Korea. India has proven skill and technological capacities in select
high-technology sectors like chemicals, pharmaceuticals, information and com-
munication technology (ICT), electrical machinery.
We note that India may not have missed the bus of innovation altogether,
although it is rhetorically lamented that India missed the bus on manufacturing.
Perhaps, India should make concerted efforts without delay in pushing for inno-
vations in the realm of Industry 4.0 and support adoption of the new vintage of
technologies for industrialisation, urbanisation, connectivity, development and
sustainability. Industrialisation going beyond forces of multinational companies is
increasingly taking the form of techno-entrepreneurship in the form of Start-Ups to
develop and demonstrate new technologies to widen technology choices.
Industrialisation in future would not only thrive on the availability of resources at
competitive prices and conducive policy environment as is often argued, but on
easier access to technological solutions emerging from multiple sources–leading
technology firms, R&D institutions and innovative Start-Ups. India perhaps, has
significant opportunities in promoting techno-entrepreneurship due to its technical
skill base, vibrant economy with improved resource base, as well as long R&D
experience.
3.2 Strengthening India’s National Innovation System
National Innovation System (NIS) is a collective of institutions that interact closely

to create conditions of skill generation and knowledge creation through learning
and spillovers often leading to innovations and new technologies (Freeman 1995;
Lundvall 1992; Nelson 1993; Patel and Pavitt 1994; Metcalfe 1995). Innovation, as
is well understood, is a complex process and is culmination of technological efforts
undertaken by various institutions and players spanning government, research
organisations and the private sector. Across developing countries, public-funded
institutions of skill generation and research have been at the core of the NIS and
India is no exception. Knowledge spillover from public-funded research is sub-
stantial through various channels including skilled personnel. Increasingly, private
corporations based in technologically advanced countries have emerged to be
source of new innovations. The NIS approach suggests the importance of
cross-learning, sourcing of ideas and institutional interaction in the process of
innovation that is vulnerable to market and systemic failures. Institutional collab-

oration and interface and tacit knowledge exchanges have been particularly useful
in specific technology domains ranging from pharmaceuticals to the internet.
At the time of India’s Independence, it had only a handful of institutions per-
forming research. India focused on creating robust network of public-funded
research institutions as a matter of priority in the following decades. As elaborated
in Dhar and Saha (2014), the First Five Year Plan (1951–56) took up the task of
building national laboratories and research institutions primarily under the Council
for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). The Second Plan (1956–61) pro-
moted more broad-based scientific research and therefore research facilities were
extended to universities and other research centres. The period under these two
Plans witnessed the establishment of new technological universities (the Indian
Institute of Technology—the IITs) for higher education and research in engineer-
ing. Infrastructure at existing institutions of high repute like the Indian Institute of
Science was simultaneously expanded. Interestingly, in both these Plans and in
some others that would follow detailed proposals were drawn up to prioritise public
investment in S&T and education.
Much later, in the 1980s, discomfort about overwhelming dependence on foreign
technologies and disappointment over unsatisfactory contribution of homegrown
science towards India’s development needs triggered policy push towards techno-
logical self-reliance. During this phase, emphasis was on contextualising choice of
technology according to economic and social priorities.6 Fiscal incentives were
introduced for the first time to promote R&D in the private sector. However, the
over-emphasis on self-reliance was short-lived with the opening up of the economy
in the 1990s. In the following decades, private sector participation in the economy
substantially increased. Nevertheless, the mantle of scientific research largely
remained with public-funded institutions. During the entire period since indepen-
dence, minimal role of the private sector in R&D barring a few industries and low
impact of public-funded institutions in terms of S&T outcomes (beyond captive
strategic fields like space and defence) failed the cause of a vibrant NIS in India.
In the last decade and a half India’s innovation landscape has witnessed positive
changes with business R&D picking up. India has also seen spontaneous supply of
cost-effective innovations suited to local needs driven by individual innovators
often outside formal innovation support systems. We note that the institutional
architecture of the NIS still remains poor across technological domains. India’s
efforts at PPPs in R&D and explicit support for the private sector to come up with
technology development and commercialisation have not contributed much towards
forging widespread institutional collaborations. Proximity of public-funded insti-
tutions, private R&D establishments and firms, even though apparent in some cases,
did not lead to well-developed innovation clusters.7 In order to widely catalyse
6
This included scouting technological opportunities and sourcing of technologies from abroad.
7
This can be linked with India’s relatively low scope of university-industry co-authorship of
research articles (DST R&D Statistics 2017–18).
innovation (to cater to gaping needs of development and promote industrialisation)

India needs to greatly strengthen its NIS.
India’s Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) remains around 0.7% of GDP,
which is low compared to not only advanced economies but also several emerging
ones. However, GERD in absolute terms has tripled since 2004–05. Encouragingly,
however, the share of private sector R&D has gone up significantly in recent years
and that stood at 43.6% in 2014–15. During 2015–16 a total of 46,904 patents were
filed in India, out of which 28% were filed by Indian residents. As per WIPO
(2016), India is ranked at 10th position in terms of Resident Patent Filing activity.
Patent applications filed in India are dominated by disciplines like Mechanical,
Chemical, Communication and Computer/Electronics. Scientometric studies for
India have consistently highlighted the serious shortfall in terms of impact of
scientific research originating in India and that reflects the paradox in terms of the
thrust that S&T, fortunately, received in the course of post-colonial development in
India. Between 2001 and 2016, India’s global share in medium and hi-tech man-
ufacturing value added has marginally increased from 0.90 to 1.76%. Overall, in
terms of ‘quality’ of output India’s R&D landscape continues to suffer from
immense heterogeneity that weakens the NIS.
Since the last decade, to promote research, knowledge creation and collaboration
in specific priority areas, India has introduced several S&T missions that are meant
to produce technological solutions and innovations. The S&T missions are mostly
steered by the DST in partnership with relevant research institutions. The S&T
missions are generally focused on S&T components unlike comprehensive sectoral
industrial missions referred to earlier (e.g. the Automotive Mission Plan, the
National Electric Mobility Mission Plan and the National Solar Mission). The
technology missions currently under operation by the DST include Water
Technology Initiative Programme; Clean Energy Research Initiative; Nano-Science
and Technology Mission; and National Super Computing Mission. Very recently,
DST has introduced the scientific mission on Cyber Physical Systems.
It is important to note that India is recognised globally for low-cost innovations
even in relatively advanced scientific domains including healthcare, desalination,
and renewable energy among others. In these areas, technological foresight, per-
sistent S&T efforts and scientific skills (often generated in the public sector) helped
in attaining the desired results. In Box 1 we highlight three such sectors. These
sectors are also reflective of India’s current priorities on sustainable development.
Box 1: India’s S&T leadership on the Sustainability Triad:

Health-Water-Energy
Vaccine Development: Vaccines that are currently available are lesser in
number than the target diseases. The efficacy of existing vaccines is being
continuously analysed and improved. India emerged as a hub of vaccine
research and has been successful in commercialising a host of candidate
molecules (hepatitis B, typhoid, anti-rabies, DTP-HB, DTP-HB-Hib, mOPV
type 1, leprosy, hepatitis A, etc.). India’s contribution to Global Public Goods
in this sector can be gauged from the fact that around 60% of all
GAVI8-procured vaccines are manufactured in India. Vaccine research in
India has benefitted from both public and private R&D.
Water: Water demand in India has been estimated to increase from 710
billion cubic metres in 2010 to almost 1180 billion cubic meters in 2050 with
domestic and industrial water consumption expected to increase almost 2.5
times. To meet future demand, India is augmenting supply of clean water
through desalination, rainwater harvesting and recycling and management of
water resources. India has achieved considerable success in desalination
projects. India has also developed several low-cost water purification tech-
nologies (often by public-funded research organisations) and has promoted
diffusion of such technologies in the form of clean water kiosks.
Solar Energy: India has set an ambitious target of increasing renewable
energy capacity by more than 5 times from 32 GW in 2014 to 174 GW by
2022. India targets deploying 20,000 MW of grid-connected solar power by
2022. This has been backed by efforts at reducing the cost of solar power
generation through aggressive R&D and domestic production of critical
components. India also played an important role in the formation of the
International Solar Alliance (ISA), an institution with membership of 121
prospective countries along the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn that receive
plentiful of sunlight. This platform is meant to address the special needs of
these countries and generate larger quantum of investment and resources.
Source: Chaturvedi and Saha (2016)
4 The Evolving Policy Direction
4.1 Contemporary Priorities
The National Manufacturing Policy (NMP) 2011, suggested revival of sectoral

policies. NMP gave special attention to some of the sectors such as textiles and
garments, leather and footwear, gems and jewellery, and food processing industries
(categorised as employment-intensive industries); machine tools; heavy electrical
equipments; heavy transport, earthmoving and mining equipments (Capital
Goods Sector); some industries which are strategically significant like IT hardware
and electronics; aerospace; shipping; defence equipment; telecommunication
8
A Global Vaccine Alliance (GAVI) is public–private partnership based international organisation
established in 2000 with a common goal of improving the access of new and underused vaccine for
children, who are living under extreme poverty globally.
equipment; and solar energy; and the industries where India has traditionally held
on to its competitive advantage like automobiles; pharmaceuticals; and medical
equipment; apart from separately considering SMEs and Public Sector Enterprises.
The NMP focussed on: Regulations including Exit Rules; Technology;
Sustainable Industrialisation; Skills; SMEs; Infrastructure and Government
Procurement and promotion of cluster based industrial development in order to reap
economic benefits of industrial agglomeration (creation of National Investments
and Manufacturing Zones (NIMZs). The major objective of the NMP was slated as
increase in the sectoral share of manufacturing in GDP to at least 25% by 2022, and
to increase the rate of job creation so as to create 100 million additional jobs by
2022.
Apart from the broad policy approach, India also introduced specific sectoral
policies like National Textile Policy (first launched in 2000); National Policy on
Electronics (2012) for developing Electronics System Design & Manufacturing
(ESDM); Automotive Mission Plan (2016–26); National Capital Goods Policy
(2016); National Electric Mobility Mission Plan (2020) (NEMMP). Such sectoral
policies were designed to address specific challenges faced by key sectors in
manufacturing in achieving long term competitiveness, value addition and export
promotion. A crucial challenge has been the skewed flow of FDI in the manufac-
turing sector, since services continued to attract the lion’s share. The ‘Make in
India’ programme launched in 2014 intensified the process and offered new
opportunities along. Firstly, a shift in approach from SEZs/NIMZs to Industrial
Corridors which combines approaches on industrialisation with urbanisation);
secondly, emphasis on Entrepreneurship Development and initiatives like Start-up
India to encourage young people to come up with new business model; Ease of
Doing Business (to achieved through favourable Entry, Exit and Tax policies) and
focus on select areas: Defence, Pharma, Medical Device (in manufacturing). We
note that India’s success in pharmaceuticals, automobile/autocomponents industry,
and more recently in mobile handset manufacturing emerged from careful industrial
policy.
The NITI Aayog of the Government of India, along with some of the leading
infrastructure ministries have so far made several attempts at defining and strate-
gising India’s future course in digital economy, sustainable urbanisation and
transportation, circular economy, renewable energy among other areas. While
apparently, this may not give any clear idea about an evolving industrial strategy,
the multipronged policy approach has strong resemblance to what analysts envision
of a dynamic industrial policy which would be relevant in the twenty-first century.
Effective paradigm shifts in the design of industrial policy firmly embedded in local
contexts would have significant implication for the economy as well as the domestic
industry. While the evolving strategy on technology-led development is futuristic it
has to take into consideration issues like extent of technology dependence and
options for industrial development and innovation. The later components have
received inadequate attention across future strategy domains barring a few areas.
NITI Aayog (2016) highlights the dichotomy in terms of FDI inflows for
electronics manufacturing vis-à-vis telecommunication services. While addressing
the challenges of the electronics sector, it reports that the electronics manufacturing
industry received a small fraction of the FDI into India. From 1 April 2000 to 30
June 2015, the electronics manufacturing industry received $1.68 billion of the total
FDI inflow of $258 billion, a meagre 0.66%. Out of which 6% of total FDI inflow
during 2014–15 came in telecommunications and its services (NITI 2016).
A comparison that may not be fully appropriate, NITI (2016) notes that the
electronics manufacturing industry contributes 15.5% of GDP in Taiwan, 15.1% in
South Korea and 12.7% in China. For India, this proportion is as low as 1.7%. It is
also stated that the Indian OEM/ODM (Original Equipment Manufacturing/Original
Design Manufacturing) and local component suppliers are not into advanced seg-
ments and most of the OEM specialises in downstream assembly operations.
A key policy vision adopted by the NITI Aayog has been to push mass adoption
of electric vehicles in India (NITI 2016). The need for mass adoption of electric
vehicles has been felt due to multiple challenges confronting the Indian economy
that include overwhelming dependence on fossil fuel, alarming levels of city pol-
lution, and reducing carbon footprint (India is one of the largest carbon emitters
globally). It is encouraging to note that, the policy planning is not restricted to
adoption per se and is strongly focused on local manufacturing and innovation
capabilities. The push for electric vehicles comes at the back of comfortable
renewable energy capacities, availability of skills, domestic capacity in information
technology and likelihood of future consumer demand for electric vehicles.
However, much of the consumer demand may be in the nature of shared mobility
evident from growing supply of aggregator cab services in urban areas. The policy
paper suggests that the high penetration of shared mobility could lead to higher
adoption of electric vehicles to create necessary scales. The second potential cus-
tomer base is perceived to be the huge number of two-wheeled/three-wheeled/
low-cost vehicle users (and India may ideally take leadership in focusing on
technology requirements in this segment). An Indian scheme by the name of FAME
is aimed at developing market for hybrid and electric vehicles’ and creating a
manufacturing ecosystem. Under this scheme, pilots have been launched across
cities through both public and private companies to develop charging infrastructure
and promote adoption of green mobility technology.
The design of the industrial policy on electric vehicles incorporates new-age
skills and opportunities for employment. It is suggested that skills on IoT and Big
Data Analytics would be needed in addition to traditional skills. The global trend
towards promotion of electric vehicular mobility is prominent along new areas
(such as autonomous driving and predictive maintenance) or old areas like
improvement through automation (fleet management, infrastructure planning,
supply and manufacturing management, quality assurance, and in-vehicle
experience).
In this policy framework, significant emphasis has been given on domestic
manufacturing, identification of technology gaps, appropriate capability building,
innovation and environmental sustainability. Box 2 gives details of proposed
instruments to promote manufacturing and innovation in that regard.
Box 2: NITI Aayog’s Policy Vision on Electric Vehicles

Make in India Strategy for Electric Vehicles: It is recommended that fin-
ished electric cars (and chargers) can have highest import duty; while specific
components like batteries, air-conditioners, power-modules, etc. may have
moderate import duty; and further below parts like battery-cells, motors, ICs,
magnets, and connectors should be eligible for zero duty. Additionally, tax
incentives need to be provided to cell producing companies (as well as for
Lithium-ion battery recycling plants and chemical industries, which would
convert battery materials into chemicals).
Innovation Needs: India needs a minimum of 10 GWh cells by 2022
(thereafter 50 GWh by 2025). India has placed high priority on expanding
capacities for manufacturing cells. It is aimed that such cells would be of su-
perior quality in terms of energy-density (size and weight), life-cycles, safety,
temperature tolerance, etc. and also be price competitive. Manufacturing
facilities can be set up through both Greenfield and brownfield investments.
The Government proposes to provide R&D grants through some grand
challenge schemes, for product-development and commercialisation within a
stipulated timeframe. The policy prioritises short-term R&D needs in areas
that include electric motors and controllers, DC-DC converters, EV chargers,
electric power-steering, electric power-brakes, electrical air-conditioners,
vehicle control and management and communication protocols. Implications
of large scale charging on the electric grid would be studied and integrated
into the strategy. Long term R&D needs would potentially be pertaining to
areas like hydrogen fuel-cells, battery-chemistry (with higher specific energy
and energy densities), cell materials and chemicals, distributed motors, bat-
teries that can withstand higher temperatures, motors without permanent
magnets, introducing such technologies for heavy trucks, and two-way power
transfer between grid and EV chargers. Also, the policy recommends creating
research networks with premier R&D institutions and the industry.
Source: NITI Aayog & World Energy Council (2018).
A major demand for industrial production would be derived demand emerging from
India’s massive expansion of infrastructure, energy supply, connectivity, urbanisation
and mobility beyond the consumer goods industry. These processes already have
futuristic design based on smart and interconnected technologies, and therefore would
be driven through use of advanced technology-intensive equipment manufacture and
supply. Rapid expansion of Metro Railway network in Delhi and other cities, prospects
of high-speed railway and upgradation of conventional rail system with safety features,
speed, passenger comfort and modern and integrated terminals would generate huge
demand for industrial goods. India’s strategy on industrialisation should be able to
anticipate such needs and promote innovations, joint ventures, technology transfer and
enhanced domestic capacity. Some efforts have been made in this direction through the
establishment of the Technology Watch and Foresighting (TWF) Division under the
Department of Science and Technology (DST) in April 2014. In order to strengthen
manufacturing capabilities in new devices leveraging on recent technological advan-
ces, the DST has also launched a program on Advanced Manufacturing Technologies
(AMT) with the following thrust areas: nanomaterials and surfaces; robotics; precision
manufacturing; pharmaceuticals manufacturing and biomanufacturing; and advanced
forming and near net-shaped processing.
4.2 Future Needs
A strong boost to industrialisation in India in the future is expected to emerge from

smart urbanisation, expanding multi-modal transport networks and new forms of
mobility. India is experiencing rapid urbanisation. However, the size of population
that urban centres are expected to support in the future poses serious challenges to
policymakers in terms of environmental sustainability, pollution, congestion, dis-
aster resilience, inclusive hinterland development, integrated public transport, waste
management, housing, renewable energy, integrated control centres, and law and
order. The Government of India’s ‘Smart Cities’ initiative is going to give push for
efficient management of cities with the use of new-age technologies and IT solu-
tions. The Smart Cities programme focuses on retrofitting, renewal or redevelop-
ment or extension depending on the choice of particular urban area (NITI 2018).
The Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT) is another
related initiative which targets improving the infrastructure of existing cities.
Closely linked with urbanisation is urban transport infrastructure that demands
innovation-led transformations (e.g. green technologies) for optimised energy use
and technology-driven commuter-friendly models that can be inclusive by design.
Modern transport infrastructure is taking shape in terms of Multi-modal Mass Rapid
Transportation Systems (MRTS) that could solve congestion issues of city traffic in
mega-urban centres. Traditional transport infrastructure like road and railway is
being modernised. Depending on the nature of emerging transport demand other
efficient modes like metro rail system, monorail, rapid metro, high-speed railway
(HSR), waterways, amphibious mobility are being actively promoted. It can only be
expected that the IoT-based digital technologies that are going to form the backbone
of such systems would need continuous innovation for adapting to emerging needs
of integrating various modes of transportation. New digital innovations and
sensor-driven devices would also be critical for public utilities (water, electricity,
and waste management) and efficient management and distribution of scarce natural
resources. This gives scope for both innovation and industrialisation.
In the context of innovation, India is not fully prepared to drive and leverage
innovations in Industry 4.0 in areas like AI and IoT. The major difficulties include
lack of enabling data ecosystems, core research in fundamental technologies and
ability to transform core research into market applications (NITI 2018). At present,
there is a serious shortfall in the size of the human resource base necessary to
catapult innovations in the direction of Industry 4.0 in India. There is a need to

enhance capabilities in AI research both in quantity (India stands distant 5th
globally) and especially in quality (disappointing impact of research produced).9
The scientific expertise in this field remains concentrated in a few institutions and
even the private sector’s contribution to AI research falls short of significance. Only
some sporadic partnerships between the public and private sector are coming up to
in the field of AI research. NITI Aayog (2018), refers to some indicative numbers to
show that India scores low on AI-related Ph.D. research, AI conferences, and
renowned scientific expertise. The limited research and application being carried
out are restricted to frontline institutions like the IISs, IITs and IIIT with some
instances of inter-institute collaboration and partnership with the industry.
The report of the AI Task Force constituted by the Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, Government of India points to several opportunities. It also acknowledges
the modest beginnings made in India on several fronts in AI research.10 The areas of
opportunities identified by the report are manufacturing; FinTech; healthcare;
agriculture/food processing; education; retail/customer engagement; accessibility
technology; environment; national security; and public utility services. To take
forward R&D in the area of AI, the report suggests full-fledged national mission to
set up centres of excellence, AI testbeds for validation of AI platforms, large data
centres, and sensitisation and capacity building at all levels. It also makes strong
recommendations on the policy and the regulatory framework for standard-setting
and deployment.
The Government has already made some serious efforts at promoting research
and innovation in these areas. The last General Budget 2018–19 doubled the
allocation on Digital India Program to the tune of Rs. 3073 crores in 2018–19. This
has led to a new scientific mission on Cyber Physical Systems under the DST to
promote establishment of specialised centers for research, training and skilling in
robotics, artificial intelligence, digital manufacturing, big data analytics and quan-
tum communication. The Government has also plans to initiate a national program
specifically in the area of artificial intelligence. Additionally, the Department of
Telecom (DoT) shall support establishment of an indigenous 5G Test Bed at the
Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai. The Government is also exploring
opportunities towards harnessing blockchain technologies for digital economy.11
9
NITI (2018) highlights USA’s leading position on AI research driven by its global MNCs and
technology firms as well as strongly supported through public spending. Europe has not lagged
behind with strong push in terms of research by the UK and Germany. China’s ambition is
reflected in its drive for industrialisation and dedicated funding for AI research and support for
high performing universities.
10
The report points that the initiatives lacks critical mass in terms of inter-disciplinary approaches.
For example in health sector, Indian biomedical and genomics institutions are yet to harness AI.
India’s participation in global AI conferences is far behind other nations with limited efforts at
creating domestic conclaves.
11
01 Feb 2018 1:38 PM by PIB Delhi “Infrastructure Allocation enhanced to Rs. 5.97 Lakh Crore:
Transport Sector Gets An All Time High Allocation”.
5 Measuring Progress and Reflections on SDG Indicator

Framework
In this section, we look at some stylised facts and scope of data-driven under-
standing with regard to the evolution, progress, monitoring of all aspects related to
the concerned areas. Information is crucial to policy planning and undertaking
necessary improvements. India’s statistical system has provided impressive support
to India’s development objectives in the past several decades. International agencies
have also been providing necessary data support through pooling of information
from all countries. The Agenda 2030 has placed highest emphasis on the need for
monitoring and review, however, with a lot of discretion to countries to decide on
SDG relevant indicator framework. We undertake an indicative comparison of
select UN SDG indicators with those identified by the MOSPI under the National
Indicator Framework (NIF) for relevant targets under SDG 9 to understand the
conceptual approach. Issue of industrialisation (and also innovation) is at the
forefront of the global development strategy under SDG 9 and 5 dedicated targets
(9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5 and 9.6) capture industrialisation. The UN Statistical Commission
has mapped 8 corresponding indicators for these targets. The NIF has proposed 12
indicators for India against the same targets. A short profile of both sets of indi-
cators is presented in Table 1.
In the above table, the latest available status for relevant global (UN SDG)
indicators has been presented drawn from Government of India sources as well as
UN agencies. This clearly indicates that data availability would not be a major
challenge for reporting on the chosen targets as per global indicators. It is under-
standable that international agencies would collect India specific information from
various official sources. However, given the multiplicity of sources and variation in
frequency of reporting a coherent picture connecting rather interlinked targets may
not emerge with disparate data sources (and frequency). Nevertheless, at least in the
context of the above targets, despite availability of data that by and large matches
the requirement of the ‘global’ indicators; it is evident from the above table that NIF
has adopted a modified set of indicators that is presumed to suit the national
context. Most interestingly, it has attempted to define the baseline value for several
indicators to enable monitoring of incremental changes.
The indicator-based approach on the SDGs, however, may not fully capture the
evolutionary dimensions or the structural factors that have strong bearing on pol-
icymaking. To put India’s progress on industrialisation in perspective with regard to
India’s pattern of structural transformation we need to reflect on historical time
series even as we consider the criticality of additional, appropriate, and timely data
to feed the monitoring exercise at the national level. In 1960 India’s GDP stood at
36.536 Billion USD and in 2017 India’s GDP increased to 2.597 Trillion USD
(World Development Indicators). In Table 2 we try to capture structural transfor-
mation of the Indian economy over the last five decades. Figures are presented at
decadal intervals given that structural transformations are usually gradual.
Interestingly, share of manufacturing in India’s GDP has remained stubbornly
Table 1 Comparative assessment of SDG 9 indicators on industrialisation and innovation for

India—global vis-a-vis national
SDG targets Global indicator Status National indicator Status
based on based on
global national
indicator indicator
(base
value)
9.2 Promote inclusive 9.2.1 16.4% 9.2.1: Annual mean Not
and sustainable Manufacturing (2017) levels of fine Available
industrialisation and, value added as a particulate matter
by 2030, significantly proportion of GDP (e.g. PM2.5 and
raise industry’s share 9.2.1 320 PM10) in cities
of employment and Manufacturing @Constant (population
gross domestic value added as a 2010 USD weighted)
product, in line with proportion of GDP (2017)
national per capita
circumstances, and
9.2.2 12.5% 9.2.2: Manufacturing 12.60%
double its share in
Manufacturing (2012) employment as a (2011–
least developed
employment as a proportion of total 12)
countries
proportion of total employment
employment
9.3 Increase the 9.3.1 Proportion of 2.6% 9.3.1: Share of 43.50%
access of small-scale small-scale (2014) Household sector in (2015–
industrial and other industries in total total industry 16)
enterprises, in industry value-added
particular in value-added
developing countries, 9.3.2 Proportion of 28% (2014) 9.3.2: Percentage/ Not
to financial services, small-scale Proportion of Credit Available
including affordable industries with a Flow to MSMEs (as
credit, and their loan or line of a Percentage of Total
integration into value credit Adjusted Net Bank
chains and markets Credit)
9.4 By 2030, upgrade 9.4.1 CO2 1.43 @kg 9.4.1: CO2 Not
infrastructure and emissions per unit of CO2 per equivalent emission Available
retrofit industries to of manufacturing constant per unit of
make them value-added, total 2010 USD value-added
sustainable, with (2015) 9.4.2: Energy use 0.00940
increased intensity of (toe/000’
resource-use manufacturing rupee)
efficiency and greater value-added (2015–
adoption of clean and 16)
environmentally
sound technologies
and industrial
processes, with all
countries taking
action in accordance
with their respective
capabilities
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
SDG targets Global indicator Status National indicator Status
based on based on
global national
indicator indicator
(base
value)
9.5 Enhance scientific 9.5.1 Research and 0.69% 9.5.1: Percentage 3.52 %
research, upgrade the development (2014–15) share of government (2015–
technological expenditure as a spending on 16)
capabilities of proportion of GDP intellectual
industrial sectors in properties product
all countries, in (Research and
particular developing Development) to
countries, including, total GDP
by 2030, encouraging 9.5.2 Researchers 216 (2015) 9.5.2: Researchers Not
innovation and (in full-time (in full-time Available
substantially equivalent) per equivalent) per
increasing the million inhabitants million inhabitants
number of research
9.5.3: Total number 6326
and development
of Patents issued (2015–
workers per 1 million
16)
people and public and
private research and
development
spending
9.6 Support domestic 9.6.1 Proportion of 37.9% 9.6.1: Share of 12.38
technology medium and (2015) Intellectual Property
development, high-tech industry Products in total
research and value-added in Gross Fixed Capital
innovation in total value-added Formation
developing countries, 9.6.2: Share of GVA Not
including by ensuring of companies with Available
a conducive policy research &
environment for, inter development as main
alia, industrial activity in total GVA
diversification and from Private
value addition to Corporate Sector
commodities
9.6.3: Share of GVA
In 2015–
of Information and
16 (in %)
Computer-related
a. at
activities in total
current
GVA price 4.18
b. at
constant
price 4.55
Source Compiled from UNIDO Database; MoSPI Baseline Report 2015–16, Research and
Development Statistics, Department of Science and Technology, India 2017–18; UNESCO
Database
Table 2 India’s sectoral value addition to GDP (%)

Year Agriculture, forestry and Industry (including Manufacturing Services
fishing construction)
1960 41.79 21.82 15.32 31.07
1970 40.39 22.69 15.02 29.74
1980 33.44 26.42 17.40 31.25
1990 27.21 28.59 17.24 34.59
2000 21.86 28.42 16.55 41.27
2010 17.52 30.08 16.21 45.18
2017 15.45 26.16 15.00 48.93
Source WDI Indicators
stable through 1960 till most recent years. However, this share was over two
percentages higher in the intervening period of 1980 and 1990 with steady decline
in this century. This is somewhat worrying given that significant policy thrust has
been imposed for expansion of the manufacturing sector in the last several years
with steady erosion of capital and regulatory bottlenecks. The share of the services
sector has grown sharply since the nineties with further upward growth in recent
years. While for a long time gain in the share of the services sector came through
adequate shrinking of the agriculture sector, more recently it may be at the cost of
industrial sector growth. India’s trade integration deepened after external sector
liberalisation was actively pursued (after 1991 reforms). This led to increased
contribution of the external sector to country’s GDP post-liberalisation, and more so
beyond 2000 (Table 3 presents the figures for trade in goods). However, mer-
chandise export performance (as share of GDP) remained stable over a long time
and contributed to widening of current account deficit. This entails that expansion
Table 3 India’s merchandise trade ratio to GDP

Year India’s trade of all products at GDP at Exports Imports Total
SITC three-digit (USD billion) constant to GDP to GDP trade to
Exports Imports Total 2010 (USD ratio ratio GDP
trade billion) ratio
1990 17.94 23.80 41.74 466.53 0.04 0.05 0.09
2000 42.36 52.94 95.30 802.75 0.05 0.07 0.12
2010 220.41 350.03 570.44 1656.62 0.13 0.21 0.34
2011 301.48 462.40 763.89 1766.59 0.17 0.26 0.43
2012 289.56 488.98 778.54 1862.98 0.16 0.26 0.42
2013 336.61 466.05 802.66 1981.95 0.17 0.24 0.40
2014 317.54 459.37 776.91 2128.82 0.15 0.22 0.36
2015 264.38 390.74 655.13 2302.41 0.11 0.17 0.28
2016 260.33 356.70 617.03 2466.18 0.11 0.14 0.25
2017 294.36 444.05 738.42 2629.54 0.11 0.17 0.28
Source Trade data from WITS and GDP from WDI Indicators
of volume, variety and value of merchandise exports need to be pursued proac-

tively. Deeper industrialisation would lead to positive and multiplier effects on
variety and value components of total merchandise exports.
6 Concluding Remarks
Policymakers in developing countries have necessarily focussed on issues of

competition and access to resources while crafting strategies on industrial devel-
opment. However, it is imperative to be able to comprehend the direction of
technological change and repositioning of industrial competitiveness across sectors.
Integration of technological change related dimensions with industrial policymak-
ing has led to successful industrialisation in some of the best performing countries,
if not all. One of the most important focus areas has been setting priorities in terms
of product and process innovations. However, a new wave of interconnected
general-purpose technologies has emerged which is going to profoundly impact
production systems. The nature of technology acquisition and innovation for the
future, therefore, needs careful consideration. India’s efforts at internalising such
technologies at a faster pace (and minimising scouting and search costs associated
with technology adoption) would definitely provide the edge in terms of production
abilities in ‘new’ products at par with global standards, demands and taste. We must
also note that technology gaps with frontier are not similar across advanced and
developing economies and hence technology leadership should spur innovation in
the domestic industry.
Greater technological capacities would ensure greater value addition in indus-
trialisation. Industrialisation would help in creating well-paid jobs. This is evident
from the fact that the leading services industries in India have created white-collar
jobs. India needs to create jobs in the category of low-skill as well as median skills.
Industrialisation is important instrument in this regard. The Indian economy is
expected to retain its growth momentum in the short-to-medium term through
greater exploitation of domestic demand as well as external sector opportunities.
But efforts must be made to improve the ‘quality’ of the growth process through
accelerated creation of decent job opportunities. This should be seconded by
transforming traditional skill development paradigms by promoting maximum use
of technology-driven product and services to reach the current and future workforce
of all age groups in entirety. Development of human capital, appropriately matching
the emerging needs should be considered foremost national priority.
Finally, the importance of sustainability cannot be overemphasised.
Industrialisation has to be sustainable and new prosperity has to be less intrusive on
nature and climate. This multiplies the role and relevance of appropriate technology
choices and the need that domestic technological efforts should contribute not only
to expanding the manufacturing base and deepen value addition but to produce
technologies to take care of the sustainability concern. It is important that we
understand industrialisation as essentially a process of developing knowledge
capacities for product and process innovations. While, in recent times substantial
emphasis has been laid on promoting and encouraging Start-Ups in India, mostly
leveraging India’s prior lead in software development. It is important to
acknowledge that SMEs in the manufacturing sector are perpetual start-ups keen on
making the best use of cost-effective technologies, improve quality and at times
come up with innovations in the product and process space.
References
Abramovitz, M. (1986). Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. The Journal of Economic
History, 46(2), 385–406.
Acemoglu, D. (2002). Directed technical change. The Review of Economic Studies, 69(4), 781–
809.
Automotive Mission Plan. (2016–26). Society for Indian automobile industry.
Bell, M., Ross-Larson, B., & Westphal, L. E. (1984). Assessing the performance of infant
industries. Journal of Development Economics, 16(1–2), 101–128.
Chaturvedi, S., & Saha, S. (2016). Financing technology delivery for SDGs: A way forward for
TFM. Policy Brief No. 76. Research and Information System for Developing Countries.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and
innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
Dahlman, C., & Westphal, L. (1982). Technological effort in industrial development. The
economics of new technology in developing countries. London: Frances Pinter.
Dhar, B., & Saha, S. (2014). An assessment of India’s innovation policies. Research and
Information System for Developing Countries.
Drandakis, E. M., & Phelps, E. S. (1966). A model of induced invention, growth and distribution.
The Economic Journal, 76(304), 823–840.
Freeman, C. (1995). The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective. Cambridge
Journal of Economics, 19(1), 5–24.
Gerschenkron, A. (1962). Economic backwardness in historical perspective: A book of essays
(No. 330.947 G381). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Hicks, J. R. (1963). The theory of wages (London: McMillan and Co.).
India First Five Year Plan. (1951–50). Planning Commission Government of India, New Delhi.
Kathuria, V., Raj, S. R., & Sen, K. (2013). The effects of economic reforms on manufacturing
dualism: Evidence from India. Journal of Comparative Economics, 41(4), 1240–1262.
Katz, J.M. (1984). Domestic technological innovations and dynamic comparative advantage:
Further reflections on a comparative case-study program. Journal of Development Economics,
16(1–2), 13–37.
Kochhar, K., Kumar, U., Rajan, R., Subramanian, A., & Tokatlidis, I. (2006). India’s pattern of
development: What happened, what follows? Journal of Monetary Economics, 53(5), 981–
1019.
Lall, S. (1986). Technological development and export performance in LDCs: Leading
engineering and chemical firms in India. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 122(1), 80–92.
Lall, S. (1992). Technological capabilities and industrialization. World Development, 20(2), 165–
186.
Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: An analytical framework. London: Pinter.
Mazumdar, D., & Sarkar, S. (2009). The employment problem in India and the phenomenon of the
854 missing middle. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 52(1).
Metcalfe, S. (1995). The economic foundations of technology policy: Equilibrium and

evolutionary perspectives. Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological
change.
Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises. (2016). National capital Goods Policy 2016
Building India for Tomorrow, Government of India, New Delhi.
Mohan, R. (2002). A decade after (1991): New challenges facing the Indian Economy. Reserve
Bank of India Bulletin, 56, 771–788.
Mohanty, S. K., & Saha, S. (2019). Manufacturing trade and employment linkages in India.
Manufacturing and jobs in South Asia: Strategy for sustainable economic growth. Springer.
National Electric Mobility Mission Plan. (2020). Department of heavy industry (2012),
Government of India.
National Policy on Electronics. (2012). Department of electronics and information technology
(2012), Government of India.
National Textile Policy. (2000). Ministry of Textile, Government of India, New Delhi.
Nelson, R. R., & Phelps, E. S. (1966). Investment in humans, technological diffusion, and
economic growth. The American Economic Review, 56(1/2), 69–75.
Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). The Schumpeterian tradeoff revisited. The American
Economic Review, 72(1), 114–132.
Nelson, R. R. (1981). Research on productivity growth and productivity differences: Dead ends
and new departures. Journal of Economic Literature, 19(3), 1029–1064.
Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: A comparative analysis. Oxford
University Press on Demand.
NITI Aayog. (2016). Make in India strategy for electronic products. Government of India, New
Delhi.
NITI Aayog. (2018). National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence. Discussion Paper June 2018.
Government of India, New Delhi.
NITI Aayog & World Energy Council. (2018). Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs): Towards A Policy
Framework, New Delhi.
OECD. (2007). Innovation and growth: Rationale for an innovation strategy. Luxembourg:
Statistical Office of the European Communities.
Panagariya, A. (2008). India: The emerging giant. Oxford University Press.
Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1994). National innovation systems: Why they are important, and how they
might be measured and compared. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 3(1), 77–95.
Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory.
Research policy, 13(6), 343–373.
Puga, D., & Trefler, D. (2010). Wake up and smell the ginseng: International trade and the rise of
incremental innovation in low-wage countries. Journal of Development Economics, 91(1),
64–76.
Ray, A. S. (2008). Emerging through technological capability: An overview of India’s
technological trajectory (No. 227). Working paper 227. Indian Council for Research on
International Economic Relations.
Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94
(5), 1002–1037.
Rosenberg, N. (1969). The direction of technological change: Inducement mechanisms and
focusing devices. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 18(Part 1), 1–24.
Samuelson, P. A. (1965). A theory of induced innovation along Kennedy-Weisäcker lines. The
Review of Economics and Statistics, pp. 343–356.
WIPO. (2016). World Intellectual Property Indicators.
Chapter 4
Health and Well-Being
An Assessment of Issues of Access
and Prevention
T. C. James
Abstract Health has been a major aspect of development both in the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The
SDGs bring in the dimension of the sectoral linkages of health across the different
goals. India’s commitment to the health goal derives from its Constitutional obli-
gations and national policy priorities. India, however, has still to travel a good
distance to reach the target of Universal Health Coverage (UHC), though there has
been significant progress during the last few decades in this regard. Various chal-
lenges in the efforts to provide affordable access and ensuring preventive health care
include diverse dimensions of governance, society, environment, innovation and
finance. India has launched a number of programmes in sanitation, safe drinking
water, nutrition, reproductive and sexual health, immunisation, access, health
insurance, communicable and non-communicable diseases, and infrastructure and
human resources. Some of them are of recent origin and some initiated few decades
ago. Special focus is also being given to innovation in health care. India has also
been trying to leverage its strength in its own systems of medicine to achieve
quality health care. Monitoring of the SDG targets, indicator wise, has been paid
special attention and much focus laid on sub-national level implementation. These
efforts are likely to make the achievement of the SDG 3 a possibility.
Keywords Universal Health Coverage Preventive Health Care Ayushman

Bharat National Health Mission
The contribution of Mr. Apurva Bhatnagar, Research Assistant, RIS in preparing the graphs and
tables is acknowledged.
T. C. James (&)
Core IVB India Habitat Centre, Research and Information System for Developing Countries,
Lodhi Road, 110003 New Delhi, India

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_4
66 T. C. James
1 Introduction
India with the world’s second-largest population and significant development gaps
are undertaking transformative policy approaches and dynamic programme inter-
ventions to make Health for All a reality and achieve SDG 3 within the stipulated
time frame. This chapter explores how the health goal and targets dovetail with
India’s own health policies. It makes an evaluation of the progress that has been
achieved, the major challenges and the course corrections that are required pri-
marily from the angles of convergence and quality.
Homo sapiens like, perhaps, all other living beings, have always considered
health as a fundamental need. For preservation and passing on of life, each
organism has to ensure that its body remains fit and well. In the natural state, they
would ensure this through the food they eat and through the physical efforts that
they have to make to get that food. Many animals would take certain items,
otherwise ordinarily not in their diet, when they face digestion problems. These
primordial yearnings of life form found better and intelligent expressions in the
humans and they realised health as basic to development and as an instrument for
doing good, as expressed by India’s master classic poet Kalidasa, Sareeramadhyam
khalu dharmasadhanam1 meaning this body is the instrument for doing good deeds.
It is this perception that has guided India’s approach towards health for all, which
found forceful expression in the 2014 United Nations (UN) Declaration on
Sustainable Development Goals. Health and well-being of all persons of all ages
has been agreed to by all the leaders of the world as one of the goals necessary for
the all-round sustainable development of humanity. Four years have passed since
the Declaration and we are left with slightly more than a decade to achieve the goal,
as committed. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a continuum of the
earlier Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which had three goals relating to
health out of the total eight. It is now almost two decades since the world and India
too have been making concerted efforts in the area of health and, so, this is the right
time to take stock of the progress and make an assessment of how near the goal we
are. This would enable us to take remedial action, if any is required. At the same
time, it should be remembered that three years is not long enough to make accurate
predictions as 12 years are still remaining.
In the health sphere, the transition from the MDG era to the SDG epoch brought
in a major change from disaggregated and selected goals covering certain aspects of
health, with statistical targets, to a more robust and comprehensive objective of
achieving health and well-being of all human beings, focussing on quality rather
than on mere quantitative figures, though as a monitoring mechanism the impor-
tance of statistics cannot be ruled out. The indicators developed for the goal bring
this out.
1
Kalidasa, Kumarasambhavam, Sarga 5:33.
4 Health and Well-Being 67
The targets under the Health and Well-being goal speak about general health
indicators of a population such as reducing maternal, neo-natal, and Under-Five
mortality rates, ending epidemics like AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected
tropical diseases and combating hepatitis, water-borne and other communicable
diseases (CDs), and also about reducing significantly premature mortality on
account of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and road traffic accidents and also
reducing the illness and mortality due to hazardous chemicals and environmental
pollution.2 They also include targets in the areas of preventing narcotic drug abuse
and harmful use of alcohol and tobacco. UHC and access to quality health care
services and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines and
vaccines for all as well as research and development (R&D) in the areas of vaccines
and medicines find prominent place among the targets.3 What stands out in the
targets and indicators is the stress on access and prevention as well as quality. All
three are equally important considering the imperativeness of health for human
well-being as can be derived from the international and national laws which con-
sider health as a fundamental human right.
In fact, the earlier international commitments as per other declarations are on
these lines only. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948, the
first international treaty to specifically recognise the right to health, referred to
the need for a comprehensive approach to health when it stated, “Every one has the
right to standard of living adequately for the health and well-being of himself and of
the family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social
services and the right to security in the event of employment, sickness, disability,
widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his con-
trol.”4 The article also referred to maternal and childhood care as “entitled to special
care and assistance.”5 This makes an all-inclusive approach to health and brings up
finances, food, clothing and housing also as necessary pre-conditions for the
achievement of good health and well-being.
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR),
(1966), though not as comprehensive as the UDHR, binding on parties, also
identifies, inter alia, need for reduction of neo-natal and infant mortalities, pre-
vention, treatment and control of epidemic and provision of medical services. The
most important declaration perhaps was the Alma Alta Declaration (1978) which
2
Goal 3 targets and indicators in Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development
Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, available at https://unstats.un.
org/sdgs/indicators/Global%20Indicator%20Framework_A.RES.71.313%20Annex.pdf.
3
Ibid See Targets 3.8 and 3.b.
4
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 25.
5
Ibid.
68 T. C. James
identified primary health care as the key to the attainment of the goal of health to
all.6 The Declaration reaffirmed the World Health Organisation (WHO) definition
of health “as a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not
merely the absence of disease and infirmity.”7 This Declaration was made when the
world was about to accept the new liberal order in economy. What is sanguine of
this Declaration, in the context of SDGs, is that it recognised economic and social
development, based on a New International Economic Order, as of “basic impor-
tance to the fullest attainment of health for all and to the reduction of the gap
between the health status of the developing and developed countries.”8 It also
asserted that the “promotion and protection of the health of the people is essential to
sustain economic and social development and contributes to a better quality of
life.”9 These are quite unassailable statements.
It is not only international law, but Indian jurisprudence was also instrumental in
India working towards achievement of quality health care for all. The judicial
interpretations gradually expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution of
India about the right to life and personal liberty to include within its scope right to
dignified life which included health. The Supreme Court in the State of Punjab v.
Mohinder Singh Chawla10 held that the “right to health is integral to the right to
life” and the government has a “constitutional obligation to provide health facili-
ties”.11 Various articles under the Directive Principles of State Policy in the
Constitution also talk about different aspects of health making the achievement of
them a state duty.
2 National Health Policy, 2017 and SDG 3
India’s health commitment under SDGs is to be taken in the above backdrop. For
the country, it was a reaffirmation of its own commitments and obligations under
the Constitution and various international treaties. That being so, it moved swiftly
towards chalking out strategies for achieving health for all commitment contained
in the SDGs. A National Consultation on SDG 3 with states and other stakeholders
was organised in New Delhi in February 2016 wherein various issues and chal-
lenges towards UHC were discussed. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare
came out with Situation Analyses: Backdrop to the National Health Policy-2017.
6
WHO, 1978, Alma Alta Declaration, Article V. Available at www.who.int/publications/almaata_
declaration_en.pdf.
7
Ibid., Article I.
8
Ibid. Article III.
9
Ibid, Article IV.
10
State of Punjab v. Mohinder Singh Chawla (1997) 2 SCC 83.
11
Ibid. Para. 2.
This captured the progress made by the country in achieving the MDGs and also
since the National Health Policy-2002 (NHP-2002). The government built the
essential elements drawn from the situation analysis, the commitments under
international treaties and the SDGs into the National Health Policy brought out in
2017.
The “attainment of the highest possible level of health and well-being for all at
all ages”12 is the goal of the National Health Policy-2017 (NHP-2017). This it
proposes to achieve through “preventive and promotive health care orientation in all
development policies, and universal access to good quality health care services”.13
It recognises the pivotal importance of SDGs and provides an indicative list of
“time-bound quantitative goals aligned to ongoing national efforts as well as the
global strategic directions,”14 but quality dimension runs through the document as
could be gleaned from the Key Policy Principles, and also the frequently used term
‘quality’.15
Along with quality, the other crucial elements of the new Policy are access,
prevention and wellness. It is more economical to prevent the onset of sickness than
curing the same; it saves man-hours that can be gainfully employed from being lost
to sickness. India has not only opted for ‘Health for All’ but as a complement to the
same goes for ‘Health in All’. In tune with this approach and in order to improve the
environment for health, coordinated action is envisaged in the following seven
priority areas:
(a) The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (the clean India mission)
(b) Balanced, healthy diets and regular exercises
(c) Addressing tobacco, alcohol and substance abuse
(d) Yatri Suraksha (passenger safety)—preventing deaths due to rail and road
traffic accidents
(e) Nirbbaya Nari—action against gender violence
(f) Reduced stress and improved safety in the work place
(g) Reducing indoor and outdoor air pollution.16
Addressing these seven India-specific issues would hasten its achievement of UHC
and in a sustained way.
The access challenges are addressed by reorganising the public health care
delivery systems, health infrastructure and human resource development, and
mainstreaming of AYUSH services. Comprehensive primary care and an
output-oriented secondary and tertiary care and assured free drugs, diagnostic and
emergency services to all in public hospitals, and improving efficiency of health
systems are major elements of the new strategy. A number of targeted programmes
12
National Health Policy 2017, Para 2.1.
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
The term finds mention in 37 places in 28 paragraphs.
16
National Health Policy 2017. Para. 3.2.
70 T. C. James
to address specific issues like malnutrition, vaccination, tuberculosis, Human

immunodeficiency virus infection and acquired immune deficiency syndrome
(HIV/AIDS), leprosy, communicable and non-communicable diseases, and mental
health are provided in the Policy. Medical and para-medical education, health
management and governance issues are also addressed therein.
A concerted and sustained implementation of the policy, the strategies and the
programmes should pave the way towards the early achievement of Health for All.
What matters, however, is how the implementation is managed. In the past also,
the policy has been quite supportive of the country’s international commitments and
constitutional obligations. At the stage of translating the policy into concrete
actions, various challenges are faced which impeded in the past the achievement of
the policy objectives. Therefore, one needs to examine the challenges and also
explore ways to overcome those challenges to make a realistic assessment of the
progress of the journey towards Health for All. In order to make a near accurate
measure of the distance that the country will have to travel to reach the destination
of health and wellness for all, in the time frame that it has set itself, we need to take
stock of the current state of health and disease indicators.
India, like most other colonised countries, had started with very low health
indicators at the time of Independence. Life expectancy was as low as 32 in 1947.
Much progress has since then been made but in various indicators, India still lags
behind most other countries. The concerted efforts, particularly, during the MDG
period resulted in improvements in some of the indicators. Life expectancy at birth
reached 68 years, though it is less than that of almost all developed countries (See
Table 1 in Annexure). India also did reasonably well in the areas of reducing
Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR), Neo-natal Mortality Rate (NMR) and Infant
Mortality Rate (IMR) during the MDG years. (See Table 1 in the Annexure). MMR
has declined to 174 in 2015 from 540 in 2000. Since 2015 improvements have been
reported in some of the indicators like IMR which has declined to 34 in 2016, and
U-5 Mortality Rate to 39.4 in 2017.
Vector-borne diseases have always been a priority area in national health pro-
grammes and while much success has been achieved, much more remains to be
done as may be seen from Table 1 in the Annexure. A case in point is cholera
which has been historically a devastating disease in India during the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries. With proper and effective medical treatment India has
impressively maintained its cholera fatality rate below one percent from the start of
this century.17 Moreover, the worldwide fatality rate of cholera was 0.8% in 2015,
which further increased to 1.8% in 2016.18 For both these years, India maintained a
fatality rate of just 0.4% which is well below the global levels. It has also been able
to reduce the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) per 100,000 population per year to 204
in 2017, Malaria incidence per 1000 population at risk to 18.8 in 2016, and HIV/
17
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cholera.
18
https://www.who.int/gho/epidemic_diseases/cholera/cases_text/en/.
AIDS to 0.28% in 2016. But the country cannot say that it is outside the danger
zone of communicable diseases, particularly the three big vector-borne ones,
namely, tuberculosis and malaria and also cholera which can breakout as an epi-
demic anytime.
Along with CDs, India now has the burden of NCDs also. The latter accounts for
63% of deaths in India; the percentage of cardiovascular alone is 27 and that of
cancer 9. Injuries are also becoming a major issue, accounting for 11% in 2016.
Total NCD deaths are 5995,000. The risk of premature death between the ages of
30 and 70 is now 23%. Suicide mortality rate per 100,000 population is 16.19
Globally 71% of the 57 million deaths in 2016 are accounted for by NCDs. The
percentage of cardiovascular is 31 and that of cancer 16%. Injuries account for 9%
deaths. Some of the risk factors identified by WHO for NCDs are alcohol con-
sumption, physical inactivity, tobacco use, diabetes and ambient and household air
pollution. Obesity, both among adults and children, is also fast becoming a major
cause of concern. Special programmes are in place now for addressing these
concerns.
3 Challenges
It is not deniable that much progress has been made by the country in the road
towards UHC, but what comes out from the status assessment is that much more
remains to be done, particularly in affordable access to quality health care as well as
preventive health care. There are many challenges and risk factors spread over
several areas. Health for All, UHC and public health care are all concepts that are
interlinked, but provision of affordable and accessible primary health care system is
a pre-requisite for achievement of them. It is axiomatic to state that the primary
health care system is the most important tool in the hands of public health officials
(Sundar et al. 2015) and this throws up specific governance challenges.
There are multiple players in the field and many dimensions to the problem. As
per the Constitution, public health and sanitation including hospitals and dispen-
saries are in the State List of subjects in the Seventh Schedule20 putting the onus on
ensuring health and sanitation on the state governments. At the same time, inter-
national commitments and national policies on health are made by the central
government. The seventy-third amendment of the Constitution introduced a new
Part IX in the Constitution strengthening the Panchayati Raj institutions (local
self-governments) whereby an Eleventh Schedule was added to the Constitution
listing the subjects for the Panchayati Raj (PR) institutions. As per this list, health
and sanitation, including hospitals, primary health centres (PHCs) and dispensaries
19
WHO, Noncommunicable Diseases Country Profiles 2018, p. 106.
20
Constitution of India, Seventh Schedule, List II—State List, Item 6.
72 T. C. James
are among the responsibilities of the local institutions. Therefore, all the three levels
of government have to act in concert to ensure proper health care system in the
country that can deliver health and well-being for all. The NHP-2017 is aware of
this. It recommends rightly “equity sensitive resource allocation, strengthening
institutional mechanisms for consultative decision-making and coordinated imple-
mentation, as the way forward.” Most of the public hospitals and dispensaries in the
country are with the central and state governments. The setting up of PHCs is also
mostly done by the centre and states. Perhaps, the supervision and monitoring of the
PHCs can be entrusted to the PR institutions. Monitoring of the PHCs by the
representatives of the people at local level should ensure better quality of services.
But when the doctors and para-medical staff are central or state government
employees, there will be limitations to the control that the local institutions can
exercise. One way out is handing over the entire administration of the PHC
including the human resources management to the local bodies with earmarked
financial allocations to them. This may lead to local recruits, which, from the
experience with ASHAs (Accredited Social Health Activists), though they are
mainly voluntary, should be welcome. This communitisation21 would make pri-
mary health care locally owned and managed and produce better results than
otherwise.
Convergence of various public services for public health is another dimension of
governance challenges. From the planning stage itself, such convergence has to be
there. For example, in road designs and traffic planning, health officials need to be
involved. This convergence has to extend at all administrative levels, viz., PR, state
and centre.
A dimension of governance challenges is the wide disparities between different
states and regions in health care. States’ dimension is almost unique to India. There
are states with health profiles comparable to the best in the world and there are those
which are having profiles similar to the low-end countries. States like Kerala,
Sikkim and Goa boast of high health development indexes. Charts 1, 2, 3 and 4 in
the Annexure present the states’ picture in some of the key health indicators like
IMR, life expectancy, U-5MR and MMR. The states, among the bigger ones, which
are doing better are Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and
Maharashtra and the states which have to catch-up much are Uttar Pradesh, Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Odisha and Assam. The smaller states and the
North-Eastern region are doing comparatively better. Maternal and childcare is
the weak point in many states. As per a special Survey of Deaths (2001–2003), the
major causes of maternal death are haemorrhage, sepsis, hypertensive disorders,
obstructed labour, and abortion.22 With proper medical care, all these can be
avoided. There is not much change in the relative status of states in their
21
Community Action for Health is one of the key strategies of National Health Mission.
22
Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Health and Family Welfare
Statistics in India 2017, p. 214.
performance on health care during the last 15 years or so. As per the NHP-2002, the
better performing states were Kerala, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu and the low
performing states were Orissa, Bihar, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya
Pradesh.23 It remains almost the same, pointing to the need for more focussed than
hitherto and intensive strategies in the low performing states.
Another unique challenge for India in health care is the social dimension. Rao
(2017) identifies four sensitive points of social conflict in India as caste, religion,
language and class but proposes class as the connecting thread.24 However, caste
carries heavy historical burden and not amenable to change as a result of personal
and other efforts. The caste system of the country with its identified castes for
certain jobs such as scavenging necessitates special focus on the traditional low
strata of society. The scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are the ones with low
health indicators. This varies depending on the sector. Similarly, slum dwellers tend
to fall ill, maybe because of malnutrition, but also because of unhygienic living
conditions and epidemics can spread fast among them due to congested habitations.
Studies point out the existence of customs, traditions and taboos which stand in the
way of sanitation and nutrition. Preference for open defecation in rural India (Dreze
2016) is a case in point. When one looks at the enormous scale of the problem, one
realises that it is not an easily surmountable challenge with merely ensuring
availability of toilets. It would call for an attitude change among the affected
populations and health policy and programme-makers understanding the socio-
logical dimensions of the challenges.
Climate change and environmental challenges are of comparatively recent ori-
gin, but are affecting almost all countries. However, in the case of rapidly indus-
trialising countries like India, their impact is much higher than that in the already
industrialised countries; the latter are now fast moving from fossil fuel-dependent
energy supply to alternative environment friendly sources of energy whereas the
former have to continue to depend on the fossil fuel for industrialising their
economies. This leads to pollution-related health problems such as respiratory
ailments like asthma. With increasing industrialisation, the quantum of hazardous
industrial waste has been steadily increasing. These wastes affect both health of
humans as well as the environment. Linked with environmental pollution and cli-
mate change issues is sanitation, which has both personal and environmental
dimensions. Open defecation causes environmental pollution.
India has ratified the Paris COP (Conference of Parties) 21 Climate Change
Agreement (2016) and so are its neighbouring countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan,
China, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, whose action in this area will
have impact on India also. India is committed to reducing its greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions intensity by 30–35% below its 2005 level by 2030. Action is
already underway with cancellation of 13.7 GW of planned coal plants, reduction
23
NHP-2002, para. 2.21, Box II.
24
Rao, K. Sujatha, Do We Care. P. xviii.
74 T. C. James
of coal imports by 21.7% and announcement of no new plants to be built until at

least 2026 by the Government of India, during 2017.25
These conventional and non-conventional, and common and unique challenges
call for multi-sectoral and multi-dimensional and orthodox and unorthodox
responses. That itself is a challenge, the transformative challenge, of changing the
approaches, strategies and attitudes. The NHP-2017 has already indicated a new
approach that takes a holistic view of the things and of involving all the related
sectors. The achievement of SDG 3 requires a total transformation of the way
policymakers and stakeholders look at related issues. It calls for a people-centric
approach towards all issues in which human being is placed at the centre of
development policies. All policies and strategies will have to be focussed on them.
The effectiveness of such policies and strategies will have to be measured on that
yardstick alone. From a purely GDP growth-oriented policy, it will have to be for
improving the wellness of humans. That would definitely transform health from the
peripherals of public policies to the core. This is easily said than done because of
various compulsions on policymaking such as need to show measurable outcomes
in economic progress in the short-term.
Two very important challenges that can make or unmake the achievement of
SDG on health are those of innovation and finance. Innovations are the path for a
great number of people to obtain quality health care at an affordable cost (Khasru
2017). These innovations can be in product development including medicines and
medical device and systems improvements comprising advancements in health
management and delivery systems. The innovations should be guided by cost
considerations. Many low-cost technologies that can be effectively utilised in health
care have been developed by various scientific and educational institutions in the
country. A strong administrative commitment to encourage and popularise the use
of them is needed both as an incentive to the innovators and also in the interest of
the patients.
The second very important challenge is that of providing adequate financial
resources for health care. Total health care expenditure as a percentage of the
national GDP is not always the best way to assess this aspect. Health, after food, is
one area where people are compelled to spend, even when they find it difficult to
afford. When out of pocket expenditure is high, it leads, a good number of popu-
lation at the lower scale of the economic ladder to a debt trap from which they find
it difficult to escape. The policymakers need to have the realisation that expenditure
on health care is an investment in economy. Studies have brought out that
improvements in health and health care have resulted in 24% income growth in
some of the least developed countries (UN 2016). An approach premised on this
can lead to increased public expenditure on health.
The category of economic challenges, individual-based, are not restricted to
India or even to developing countries. It extends to major developed countries such
25
NRDC Issue Brief, The Road from Paris: India’s Progress Toward Its Climate Pledge, November
2017.
as USA also, wherever there is no comprehensive UHC system. In the absence of

UHC, the people with low income find it difficult to access health care because of
affordability factor. As may be seen from Table 2 on average medical and other
related non-medical expenditure per hospitalisation for each quintile class of
UMPCE, at Annexure, the expenditure is increasing steadily as the economic class
of the patients is ascending, both in rural and urban areas, except from quintile 2–3
in rural areas. The total expenditure by the highest urban quintile class is almost
four times that of lowest rural quintile. What the table brings out is that as economic
affordability increases people tend to spend more on health.
The financial allocation by the central and state governments has not been as
required by a country with the health challenges that India has been having since
long. The NHP-2002 had frankly admitted certain uncomfortable truths:
The public health investment in the country over the years has been comparatively low, and
as a percentage of GDP has declined from 1.3 percent in 1990 to 0.9 percent in 1999. The
aggregate expenditure in the Health sector is 5.2 percent of the GDP. Out of this, about 17
percent of the aggregate expenditure is public health spending, the balance being out-of
pocket expenditure. The central budgetary allocation for health over this period, as a
percentage of the total Central Budget, has been stagnant at 1.3 percent, while that in the
States has declined from 7.0 percent to 5.5 percent. The current annual per capita public
health expenditure in the country is no more than Rs. 200.
As stated by the Policy itself, given the above statistics, the reach and quality of the
health services have been below the desired standards. That Policy, therefore, had
resolved to increase health expenditure by the government as a percentage of GDP
to 2% by 2010.26
As per the Situation Analyses prepared as Backdrop to the NHP-2017, the
government spending on health care in India was only 1.15% of GDP far below the
target of 2% by 2010 set by NHP-2002, even in 2017. The NHP-2017 proposes to
increase health expenditure by the government as a percentage of GDP to 2.5% by
2025. This is a significant rise and, in effect, is doubling the current level of public
expenditure. In the Voluntary National Review of the SDGs at the UN High Level
Forum during 2017, India has restated this commitment. Apart from the quantitative
dimension, the Policy also devotes considerable attention to the quality and equity
aspects. It makes an unambiguous statement that a higher unit cost or some form of
financial incentive be provided to facilitate quality of care.27
How the country strategises to face these challenges will decide the speed at
which it proceeds to the SDGs. The efforts in the recent past create confidence.
These efforts include prevention and access measures as well as focus on quality
dimension.
26
Box-IV in para. 3.1 of NHP, 2002.
27
NHP-2017, para. 12.
76 T. C. James
4 Towards Health and Well-Being of All28
Prevention of illness is the best way to ensure health and wellness and also to
achieve the SDG. However, this is easier said than done. Recently, India has
initiated a number of programmes to improve the milieu. Most of these schemes
have an access dimension and there is a need for creating public awareness along
with necessary infrastructure.
Sanitation: The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, referred to earlier, is a mega project to
address this issue and it has made a tremendous impact during the last four years.
More than 913 lakh household toilets have been constructed under the project since
2nd October 2014, by end of December 2018; 5,39,720 villages, 580 districts and
27 States and UTs have been declared open defecation free.29 As per a UNICEF
report, financial savings from paying less medical costs, alone, based on reductions
in illness episodes on account of better sanitation resulting from the SBB, average
INR 8024 per household per year.30 The target is to make India open defecation
free by 2nd October, 2019.
Safe Drinking Water: India is endemic to many water-borne diseases. Cholera
outbreaks are not very uncommon in the country, as stated above. Providing safe
and adequate drinking water to each household by 2030 is a target of the Ministry
of Drinking Water and Sanitation. Under the National Rural Drinking Water
Programme (NRDWP), a total of 17, 26,031 habitations have been covered either
fully or partially till 31 December 2017. This represents 76.8% of the habitations in
the country. A submission is devoting attention to water quality.31
Waste Management: Waste management is an area that requires special attention
from the angle of prevention of diseases. The issue spans across various fields
including industrial waste, household waste, biomedical waste and so on. Much of
them are very hazardous. Efforts to streamline biomedical waste disposal has been
on for some time. The Biomedical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2016,
as amended in 2018, contain many regulations on biomedical waste. But, trans-
lating the rules to ground level practices needs much more push than is currently
there.
Nutrition: Around 45% of child mortality can be attributed to malnutrition.
According to the NFHS 2015-16, about 35.7% of under—5 children are under-
weight, 38.4% are stunted and 21% are acutely malnourished (wasted). The
Government has undertaken various policy interventions to improve this situation.
28
This Section draws heavily on National Health Profile 2018 (13th Issue) published by Central
Bureau of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Annual Report of Department
of Health &FW 2017-18 and the National Health Portal of the Ministry.
29
The number is 9,13,67,018 as of 31 December 2018. http://swachhbharatmission.gov.in/
sbmcms/index.htm.
30
Unicef, The Financial and Economic Impact of Swachh Bharat Mission in India Summary
Report, https://mdws.gov.in/sites/default/files/UNICEF_Economic_impact_study.pdf.
31
Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, Annual Report 2017-18, pp. 41–52.
Mother Absolute Affection (MAA), launched in 2016, aims to promote breast-

feeding by providing enabling environment through awareness generation,
community-level interventions, strengthening of health facilities and monitoring.32
Under the National Iron Plus Initiative (NIPI), all school-going children are given
Iron and Folic Acid (IFA) tablets and Albendazole for de-worming on a routine
basis.33’34 With a gross enrolment rate of 99.21 (2015–16) at primary level,35 this
practically reaches out to almost all children, though some drop-outs cannot be
discounted.
Malnutrition is the major cause of stunting, dwarfing and also for many diseases
including tuberculosis. While efforts are on for meeting the nutrition requirements
across the population, at a prevention level, it is necessary to attend to the issue of
the prevalence of adulteration in food items. India has a Food Safety and Standards
Act, 2006 which prescribes a number of measures. But there are loopholes in the
Act and generally consumers, particularly in the rural areas are unaware of the
provisions of the Act, resulting in widespread food adulteration which badly affects
the health of the people. Food poisoning results in fatalities too.
Reproductive and Sexual Health: Rajiv Gandhi Scheme for Empowerment of
Adolescent Girls (RGSEAG)–SABLA, implemented in 205 selected districts, aims
at providing holistic development to adolescent girls. A part of this scheme includes
giving counselling sessions to the beneficiaries regarding adolescent reproductive
sexual health, family planning, childcare practices, etc. This scheme also has a
nutrition component under which the major nutrition requirements of the benefi-
ciaries are taken care of.36 Janani Suraksha Yojana (JSY) is a scheme that aims to
promote institutional deliveries and provide for antenatal care as well as
post-delivery care to women in the states where rate of institutional deliveries are
low. More than crore beneficiaries are there under the scheme in 2016–17.37 The
Pradhan Mantri Surakshit Matritva Abhiyan, launched in June 2016 is a universal
scheme that provides free and quality antenatal care to all the pregnant women of
the country on 9th of every month.38
Immunisation: From the angle of modern medicine, immunisation is the most
effective preventive mechanism and one that is a bulwark against child and infant
mortality. India has one of the “largest Universal Immunisation Programmes in the
world in terms of quantities of vaccines used, number of beneficiaries covered,
geographical spread and human resources”, according to the write-up on
Immunisation in the National Health Portal website.39 The programme which
32
http://nhm.gov.in/MAA/Operational_Guidelines.pdf.
33
https://nhm.assam.gov.in/schemes/national-iron-plus-initiative-nipi.
34
Page 37, Chapter 4, MOHFP annual report 2017–18.
35
MHRD (2018), Educational Statistics at a Glance. Table 40.
36
Page 10, Ministry of Women and Child Development Annual Report, 2014–15.
37
Point 3.4.1, Chapter 3, Maternal & Adolescent Healthcare, MOHFP Annual Report 2017–18.
38
https://pmsma.nhp.gov.in/.
39
Immunization at https://www.nhp.gov.in/Immunization_ms (Accessed on 15 January, 2019).
78 T. C. James
started originally in 1978 and converted to Universal Immunisation Programme

(UIP) in 1985 now provides free vaccines for Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, Polio,
Tuberculosis, Measles, Hepatitis B, Japanese Encephalitis and Meningitis &
Pneumonia.40 In fact, India along with other South East Asia Region countries of
WHO had made a commitment in 2013 to eliminate measles and rubella
(MR) congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) by 2020.41 Consequential MR vaccine
campaign is targeted towards 410 million children across the country.42 The
National Health Profile-2018 claims that there has been considerable progress in
this area in India. Vaccine-wise the percentages of achievements in 2016–17 are:
Tetanus Toxoid (TT) Injection for Pregnant Women—77.32, Diphtheria Pertussis
Tetanus (DPT) Pentavalent—88.23, DT/DPTS—67.76, Polio—86.67, Bacillus
Calmette-Guerin (BCG)—90.44, and Measles—88.11.43 Mission Indradhanush
aims to fully immunise more than 90% of newborns by 2020 through innovative
and planned approaches. The Government launched in 2014 the Mission
Indradhanush aimed at achieving full immunisation coverage for all children and
pregnant women. It now covers a total of 528 districts out of a total of 727
districts.44 While the progress has been impressive much more remains to be done
to achieve full universalisation of immunisation and to reap its benefits. As per
information on the National Health Portal, annually 5 lakh children die due to
vaccine-preventable diseases and another 89 lakh children remain at risk for want of
proper immunisation.45
Affordable Access: In most developing countries, including India, the major issue
in providing health care is affordable access. It requires an adequate number of
well-equipped health care facilities, including diagnostic centres and also medi-
cines. The number of hospital beds is nine per 10,000 population, as against the
Bhore Committee (1946) recommendation of 75 per 10,000–20,000 population.
The cost factor includes charges for consultation, surgical procedures, nursing care,
price of medicines and drugs, and for diagnostic test costs. Price of essential
medicines is under price control regulations, but health care costs and diagnostic
test costs mostly remain unregulated. Another related factor that affects access is the
availability of transport and the affordability of patients for the same, an aspect not
given much attention.
Ayushman Bharat: In order to enhance affordability, central and state govern-
ments have been taking recourse to health insurance schemes, but with indifferent
results. Most of them were of very limited coverage. These include the Rashtriya
Swasthya Bima Yojana, which provided hospitalisation coverage up to Rs. 30,000,
Universal Health Insurance Scheme targeting only the below poverty line
40
Ibid.
41
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, National Health Profile 2018. P. XIV.
42
Ibid.
43
National Health Profile 2018, Table 3.3.8. page 163.
44
Ibid. P. XIV.
45
Immunization at https://www.nhp.gov.in/Immunization_ms (Accessed on 15 January, 2019).
(BPL) families, and several state government insurance schemes. However, in

2018, the central government has launched a mega scheme, named Ayushman
Bharat or Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana. The number of beneficiaries will be
about 10.74 crore families or approximately 50 crore people as per the National
Health Authority.46 This is the biggest government-sponsored health care scheme in
the world. The grandness of the scheme will become evident when one realises that
the number of potential beneficiaries is more than the total populations of the USA,
Canada and Mexico. Learning from past experiences with similar schemes, it has
been provided in this scheme that it will be cashless in public and empanelled
private hospitals and also that hospitals cannot deny treatment., Under this 16,972
hospitals have been empanelled up to 10 January 2018, in which beneficiaries can
seek treatment for 1354 medical packages which include surgery, medical and
daycare treatments, cost of medicines and diagnostics, for secondary and tertiary
care which, otherwise, remain unaffordable to most. Under this programme, med-
ical insurance up to Rs. 5 lakh per family per year is provided. Under the scheme,
the premium to be paid to the insurance companies is shared between the central
government and the state government. The programme also envisages setting up of
1,50,000 Health and Wellness Centres to provide comprehensive primary health
care. The programme has the potential to transform health care in India.
Over the last few years, there has been increasing stress on quality, though the
quantity dimension is not forgotten. National health programmes, launched by the
Government of India, during the last two decades have addressed in a substantial
way several serious health concerns. These covered both communicable and
non-communicable diseases.
National Health Mission: One of the mega initiatives taken by the government in
the field of health has been the launching of the National Health Mission (NHM) in
2005. This has two major Sub-Missions, namely, National Rural Health Mission
(NRHM) and National Urban Health Mission (NUHM). It “envisages achievement
of universal access to equitable, affordable and quality health care services that are
accountable and responsive to people’s needs.”47 NRHM caters to rural population
and NUHM attends to the health care needs of the urban people, especially the
urban poor. Making available primary health care is the major component of both
the Sub-Missions. Decentralisation and community involvement are their hall
marks. The major components include Health System Strengthening,
Reproductive-Maternal- Neo-natal-Child and Adolescent Health (RMNCH+A) and
Communicable and Non-Communicable Diseases. As a corollary to the NHM
many efforts have been undertaken such as adoption of quality standards with
respect to clinical protocols, administrative and management processes and for
support services. The Indian Public Health Standards define the service package
46
https://www.pmjay.gov.in/.
47
Ministry of Health &FW, Annual Report 2017–18. P. 11.
80 T. C. James
that each health care facility must provide and also the minimum inputs required to
ensure quality of care, in terms of infrastructure, equipment, skilled human
resources, and supplies. The Mission also supports initiatives for building quality
management systems. Few of the significant contributions of NHM are deployment
of more than 10 lakh Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) across the
country to serve as facilitators, mobilizers and providers of community-level care,
setting up of Rogi Kalyan Samitis (Patient Welfare Committees), Village Health
Sanitation and Nutrition Committees and mainstreaming of AYUSH (Ayurveda,
Yoga, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy).
Malaria: This vector-borne disease usually transmitted by mosquitoes has been
known in India since at least Vedic times and the Ayurveda text Charaka Samhita
also refers to it as Vishama jvara.48 At one time, it was considered a disease in the
rural areas, but over the years it has spread to cities as well. The National Malaria
Control Programme was launched as early as 1953. There has been significant
progress in tackling the disease and reducing the number of deaths due to it. From
0.10 lakh deaths per lakh population in 2001, it has come down to 0.01 deaths per
lakh population in 2016.49 The number of deaths reported in 2017 is 104 only.50
Target 3.3 of the SDGs aims at ending Malaria by 2030. India proposes to make the
country free of Malaria by 202751 and completely eliminate the disease by 2030.
Towards this, the National Strategic Plan (NSP) 2017–22 for Malaria Elimination
has been developed by National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme. Earlier
the focus of the programme was stated, but now it has been shifted to districts.52
This should make it more effective.
Tuberculosis: TB is another major vector-borne disease in the country. As per
the Ministry of Health & FW National Health Portal,53 one-quarter of the world TB
burden was in India in 2015 which has not much changed since the country still
accounts for the largest number of TB cases at 1,908,371 in 2017.54 The NHM
gives special focus to this disease with its Revised National Tuberculosis
(TB) Control Programme (RNTCP). The country, of course, could halt the spread
and reverse the trend by 2015 as required by the MDGs. The objective of the
revised programme is to ensure access to quality diagnosis and care for all patients.
This it proposes to achieve through its various sub-activities such as through a
case-based and web-based recording and reporting of all cases, composite moni-
toring of programme performance, and programmatic management of drug-resistant
48
It is an inference drawn on the basis of the disease symptoms.
49
National Health Profile 2018. P. XIV.
50
Ibid. P. 78.
51
Narain, J. P., & Nath, L. M. (2018). Eliminating malaria in India by 2027: The countdown
begins!. The Indian journal of medical research, 148(2), 123–126. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijmr.
ijmr_1175_18.
52
Ibid. P. XIV.
53
https://www.nhp.gov.in/disease/respiratory/lungs/tuberculosis.
54
Global Tuberculosis Report 2018. P. 262.
TB cases. The web-based reporting system is named NIKSHAY (a combination of

two Hindi words, namely NI (No) and KSHAY (TB). A National Strategic Plan
(NSP) 2017–25 for TB Elimination framework has been developed and adopted in
2017. This has very specific strategies for eliminating TB in India by 2030.
Non-Communicable Diseases: Success in tackling communicable diseases
coupled with changes in lifestyles owing to newfound economic prosperity among
the middle class has led to an increased proportion of non-communicable diseases,
which, now account for 60 percent mortality in India.55 In order to tackle this
growing menace, and based on a Pilot Phase done in 10 districts starting from 2008,
India introduced the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Diabetes
and Stroke (NPCDCS) as early as 2010 initially in 100 districts of 21 States. In the
year 2013–14, the programme was integrated with the NHM. By 2016–17, it was
approved for 616 districts across the country56 As per the Annual Report for the
year 2017–2018 of the Ministry of Health & FW it is in actual implementation in
435 districts in June 2017.57 Screening and early detection, prevention, and proper
management of the diseases are the main areas of focus of the programme. It is also
engaged in nation-wide awareness generation. More than 2.24 crore people got
screened for NCDs during 2016–17.58 The programme is also connected with the
National Tobacco Control Programme (NTCP), tobacco use being a major cause of
cancer. This is one programme which has also attempted to integrate AYUSH
systems with the prevention and management of diseases.59 There are other con-
nected national programmes such as for control of blindness and visual impairment,
for prevention and management of burn injuries, and for prevention and control of
deafness. Another important programme that has a great impact on treatment certain
NCDs is the National Organ Transplant Programme. A praiseworthy initiative is the
national programme for health care of the elderly which is proposed to be extended
to all districts by 2020.60 With better health care human longevity has been growing
and the percentage of senior citizens in the population has been steadily increasing
all over the world.
Mental Health: An added dimension in international discourse on health par-
ticularly since the announcement of the SDGs is the new stress on ensuring mental
health of the population. It is now considered an integral part of health. India has a
big burden of mental disorders. As per a calculation done by the WHO, the
disability-adjusted life years (DALY) on account of mental disorders in India are
2443 per 100,000 population and the age-standardised suicide rate per 100,000
55
Ministry of Health & FW. Training Module for Medical Officers for Prevention, Control and
Population Level Screening of Hypertension, Diabetes and Common Cancer (Oral, Breast &
Cervical) 2017. P. 1.
56
Ibid.
57
Ministry of Health & FW, Annual Report 2017–18. P. 112.
58
Ibid.
59
Ibid.
60
Ibid. P. 123.
82 T. C. James
population is 21.1.61 The Government came out with a National Mental Health
Policy of India in 2014 (NMHPI-2014), which rightly defines mental health as “not
just the absence of mental disorder” but as “a state of well-being in which the
individuals realise their own abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can
work productively and fruitfully, and are able to make a positive contribution to
their community”.62 What remains a major hurdle in achieving the mental
well-being of the people is the absence of adequate number of institutions and
qualified health personnel coupled with social taboos, and patients’ reluctance to
admit to the disorders and take treatment. As per the National Mental Health Survey
of India, 2015–16, the treatment gaps for the five identified disorders of alcohol use
disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder, depressive disorder and neurosis
are 86.3, 75.5, 70.4, 85.2 and 84.0%, respectively. For tobacco use, it is as high as
91.8%.
Infrastructure and Human Resources: Basic requirements of any health care
programmes are provision of adequate infrastructure and human resources. Public
investments in health care have mostly been in these two areas. Both in health
infrastructure and human resources, there has been appreciable growth in recent
years. One must recognise the fact that India started at very low level of indicators.
Even in 1960, the country had only 200,000 beds in the 4000 hospitals and 9900
dispensaries together. The number of government hospitals alone in 2017 was
23,582 with 710,761 beds. The rural–urban break-ups of these figures are 19,810
hospitals in rural areas with 279,588 beds and 3772 hospitals in urban areas with
431,173 beds. Since, so far as hospitals are concerned rural people access facilities
in towns and cities, the disproportionately high concentration in urban areas need
not be a big concern provided adequate transport facilities exist. On average, more
than 55,000 persons are served by a government hospital and there are 1855 per-
sons per hospital bed. In the matter of primary health centres (PHCs) and dispen-
saries also, the growth figures have been impressive, from 2800 PHCs in 1960–61
to 156,231 Sub Centres, 25,650 PHCs and 5624 Community Health Centres in
2016–17.63
Apart from the physical infrastructure what determines health outcomes is the
quantity and quality of health human resources. They fall into the categories of
medical doctors, nurses, midwives and other para-medical staff. The National
Health Profile (NHPr) 2018 admits that “In India there is no reliable source giving
61
Mental health Atlas country profile 2014. https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/atlas/
profiles-2014/ind.pdf.
62
Ministry of Health & FW, 2014. New Pathways New Hope National Mental Health Policy of
India. P. i.
63
The statistics for 1960–61 have been taken from Tata Services Limited. 1986. Statistical Outline
of India 1986–87 Table 179 and for 2017 from the Ministry of Health & FW National Health
Profile 2018. Table 6.2.2.
the number of the members of the health workforce as more than half of the health
care professionals work in the unorganised private sector”.64 The NHPr 2018 gives
the data for the public sector as 1,041,395 registered Allopathic practitioners and
251,207 registered dental surgeons.65 In 1960–61, the total number of registered
doctors was 76,000 only. According to the NHPr the number of dental surgeons has
been increasing fast since 2007. There are 8,41,279 Auxiliary Nurses Midwives,
19,80,536 Registered Nurses & Midwives and 56,367 Lady Health Visitors as of 31
December 2016 in the country.66 The number of Pharmacists as on 13 November
2017 is 9,07,132.67
The quality of health care workforce is dependent on the quality of medical
education they get. While it is difficult to make an assessment of the quality, as
such, the growth dimension of medical education can be assessed. Again, the NHPr
2018 states that there have been a total admission of 52,646 in 476 Medical
Colleges, 27,060 in BDS (Bachelor of Dental Surgery) and 6233 in MDS (Master
of Dental Surgery) during 2017–18. The number of BDS colleges is 313 and that of
MDS colleges is 249.68 The number of medical colleges in the country was 60 only
with 5900 seats in 1961–62.69 Also, nursing education has also come of age. There
are a total of 6861 institutions offering various nursing diplomas/degrees with an
admission capacity of 3,22,827. The number of pharmacy institutions is 777 with
an admission capacity of 46,795 in November 2017.70 It is certainly an achievement
that the facilities for medical and para-medical education have grown significantly
during the last few decades since the country can now be assured of regular supply
of qualified personnel for the health care sector on a regular basis.
Role of Private and Public Sectors: Indians still rely most on private health care
providers for treating their diseases. That makes the private sector a major player in
its efforts towards SDG 3. This reality is underlying in the strategy of the National
Health Policy to involve the private sector in the provision of health care at all
levels. This is particularly visible in the Ayushman Bharat, the national health
insurance programme. With the liberalisation of economies towards the end of the
twentieth century, world over the issue of the role of private health care vis a vis
public health care in providing health care has been a hot topic. More than the
theoretical arguments, in a country like India where the public health care facilities
are grossly inadequate, the services of private sector will have to be depended on by
the people for their health care needs. Private sector is perceived as more efficient
than the public sector. At the same time, the treatment costs of private sector are
generally high and not affordable to most people.
64
Ministry of Health & FW, National Health Profile 2018. P. xv.
65
Ibid.
66
Ibid. P. 225.
67
Ibid.
68
Ibid.
69
Statistical Outline of India 1986–87 Table 175.
70
Ministry of Health & FW, National Health Profile 2018. Table 6.1.4 on p. 258.
84 T. C. James
Historical experiences across the globe show that UHC has been achieved, both
through public sector and private sector. Erstwhile Soviet bloc countries of Europe
and Cuba have achieved UHC through the public sector whereas, in most devel-
oped countries, the private and public sector have played roles. At the same time, in
these countries and also in countries which are making fast progress towards UHC
the public expenditure on health care has been the decisive factor. As brought out
clearly with comparative figures in the Situation Analysis prepared by the Ministry
of Health and Family Welfare as a backdrop to the NHP-2017, India’s total health
expenditure as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and its government
health expenditure as a percentage of total health expenditure have been very low
compared to other countries, be they Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) countries or BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South
Africa) countries or others. Among the BRICS countries, it is the lowest in both the
determinants. There appears a correlation between the health expenditure and the
life expectancy at birth with the countries spending more from government on
health having high life expectancy than those spending less, with the exceptions of
South Africa which spend more but lower life expectancy and Sri Lanka which is
spending less than South Africa and Brazil but is having a higher life expectancy
than both.71
In the capitalist system, the model being used is that of health insurance, but
where the public funds support the same to ensure that citizens get adequate health
care. A criticism of this model is that it may tend to be a burden on public funds.
But where public health care infrastructure is low, there may not be an alternative.
The number of PHCs in the country in 2017 was 25,710 only. There were 5820
Community Health Centres. The number of district hospitals, the kingpins of
secondary health care, was 805 only in 2017. The progress in setting up the
infrastructure has been rather slow with additions of 170 district hospitals, 1285
community health centres and 2037 PHCs only since 2010. This is not surprising
given that the allocations of public funds for health were rather low, as stated above.
What could be thought of is a sectoral approach where primary health care, not a
very attractive sector for the private entrepreneurs, is attended predominantly by the
government and in the secondary and tertiary care, both public and private insti-
tutions may co-exist. The NHP-2017 seems to accept this approach in that it
advocates the public health system at primary level, and responsive and strong
regulatory framework to guide purchasing of secondary care services from
non-government hospitals. But its recommendation that this is to be a short term
strategy till public systems are strengthened may take more time than one can
conceive, even if it ever comes to be realised, considering the meagre allocations
that the central and state governments are making for health care. In the tertiary care
services also, the Policy follows the path proposed for secondary care.
71
Situation Analysis, pg. 14, Table-2.
Innovation: Modern medicine calls for constant innovation in view of the

increasing resistance to drugs. As of now, the world is dependent on the pharma-
ceutical companies based in the developed world to innovate and provide new
drugs, a proposition which makes it quite costly. As already mentioned countries
like India which has strong generic pharmaceutical companies and high number of
educated human resources in the science fields can and should take the lead in this
regard, not only in their own interest but also those of other developing countries. It
is also necessary to ensure adequate R&D and innovation in areas of tropical
diseases and diseases which are endemic to the subcontinent, which do not get
adequate investment by the pharma companies of the West. In modern health care,
expenditure on diagnostic is very high, may be because the devices are costly. What
research and innovation can do is to come out with frugal innovations. What is to be
realised is that pharmaceutical research is a long gestation period investment and
private sector generally does not have the incentive and inclination for such pro-
grammes. The government will have to support heavily such research for which the
current level of R&D funding will have to be raised quite substantially.
5 Leveraging Local Strength Towards SDG 3
Unlike many other countries, India has an advantage in that it has, apart from the
modern allopathic system, robust Indian Systems of Medicine (ISMs) of Ayurveda,
Siddha and Unani as well as Yoga. Branding all of them with the brush of ‘tra-
ditional medicine’ takes away the experiential and experimental sciences that
developed them. The basic premises on which these systems are based on are
different from that of modern allopathic medicines. These systems do not use
synthetic chemicals but mostly plant-based products. The systems have been and
still are in wide use all across India. Coupled with them are the alternative therapies
of Homeopathy and Naturopathy as well as local health traditions. All these
together are captured in AYUSH systems. India has a large network of hospitals
and dispensaries under the AYUSH systems. There were 3943 hospitals with
55,242 beds, 27,698 dispensaries and 7,73,668 registered practitioners under the
AYUSH sector in India, as of 1 April 2017.72 A total of 5,57,890 are institutionally
qualified registered practitioners.
While health and well-being of all is a system-independent goal, Target 3.c of
SDG 3 reference to health workforce is taken as covering modern medicine health
workforce only. In the indicators that India has adopted, numbers 3.8.8 and 3.c.1
also refer to modern medicine workforce only. At the same time, appropriately
integrated use of the AYUSH systems with general health care can go a long way in
72
AYUSH in India 2017, pp. 76–77.
86 T. C. James
achievement of SDG 3, particularly when considering the infrastructure and human

resource deficiencies in the health care sector. Apart from meeting to some extent
the access challenges, integration of these systems with the general health care may
also, to some extent, address the affordability issues. It may be noted that the
allopathic doctors are also quite supportive of the AYUSH systems with 70%
perceiving these systems as useful (Priya and Shweta 2010). Also, the community
makes its own choices of the systems (where choices exist) with AYUSH being
used for both acute and chronic conditions. However, in serious emergency con-
ditions, the choice is clearly for modern medicine (Priya and Shweta 2010).
Protagonists of integrative approach to health care argue that effective use of tra-
ditional medicine and strengthening of home health care through simple remedies,
over 30% expenditure on pharmaceuticals and medical care can be saved.73
While AYUSH system can facilitate and hasten achievement of SDG-3, it is
imperative that robust and effective quality control mechanisms for AYUSH drugs
are in place. It is also necessary to have the norms for registration of AYUSH
practitioners tightened and only persons fully trained in the system should be
entitled to registration. This is necessary to protect patients from quacks and also to
generate wider trust and acceptance of the systems. The AYUSH drug manufacture
and the health services under the systems should be closely monitored. It is wel-
come that the NHP-2017 “recognizes the need to standardize and validate
Ayurvedic medicines and to establish a robust and effective quality control
mechanism” for Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Unani drugs.74 This, of course,
would necessitate establishment of institutional structures and focus on the AYUSH
education systems with a view to improving quality, a fact recognised by the
Policy.
6 Achieving SDG Within Time Frame
India has been actively pursuing the SDG goals and targets from the very beginning
and has prepared its own set of indicators under various goals to make the moni-
toring and course correction easy. Given the size of the country and the enormity of
the challenges to be overcome as well as the road to be covered, three years is rather
a short period to make a realistic assessment in the case of health sector targets. But
the progress so far as detailed above (in the section, Towards Health and Well-being
of All) gives an idea about the possibilities of achieving the targets. At the same
time, there are issues with regard to targets, indicators and monitoring.
73
Patwardhan Bhushan, Integrative Approaches for Health, p. 13.
74
NHP-2017, para. 9.
6.1 Targets and Indicators and Sub-National Performance
SDG 3 has 13 targets and 41 indicators, but one target (Target 3.c)75 has no indicator.
According to the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, data is
available for 36 indicators only. The indicators are Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR),
Percentage of births attended by skilled health personnel (both 5 year period and
1 year period), Percentage of women with a live birth who received antenatal care
four times or more, Under-Five mortality rate, Neo-natal Mortality Rate, Percentage
of children fully immunised, Number of new HIV infections per 1000 uninfected
population, Tuberculosis incidence per 100,000, Malaria incidence per 1000 popu-
lation, Viral Hepatitis incidence per 1,00,000, Dengue case fatality Ratio, Number of
Chikunguniya cases, Number of new cases of Kalaazar, Number of new cases of
Lymphaitic Filariasis, Leprosy cases HIV prevalence rate, Number of deaths due to
cancer, Suicide mortality rate, Percentage distribution of leading cause groups of
deaths, Percentage of persons consuming alcohol regularly, Number of persons
treated in de-addiction centres, Percentage of population who consume alcohol,
Death rate due to road traffic accidents, Percentage of married women who use
modern family planning methods, Percentage of adult women who are already
mothers or pregnant, Percentage of institutional births, Percentage of TB cases suc-
cessfully treated, Percentage of people living with HIV receiving ART, Proportion of
population who are taking antihypertensive medication, Proportion of population
who are currently taking medication for diabetes, Proportion of women who were
screened for cervical cancer, Prevalence of current tobacco uses, Total physicians,
nurses and midwives per 10,000 population, Mortality rate attributed to unintentional
poisoning, Proportion of people reporting Asthma, and Percentage of government
spending on gross capital formation in health sector to GDP. Wide and varied as
these indicators are, they enable the authorities to capture the health profile, assess
periodic progress and enable targeted interventions and course corrections.
Table 1 gives comparative health profiles of India and the world in the important
parameters of life expectancy, incidence of tuberculosis, infant mortality, maternal
mortality, neo-natal mortality and incidence of HIV during the period from 2000 to
2017. Table 3 capturing India’s progress in Child Health indicators and
Communicable Diseases during 2015–2017 in the Annexure paints a rather con-
trasting picture. India is well on the road in the matter of child health whereas it has
to catch-up much with regard to infectious diseases. The country has made very
good progress in reducing U5MR from 126 in 1990 to 39 in 2017, but it is still a
good way from reaching the target of 25, though at the pace of 4.3% annually,
which it was between 1990 and 2017 (Unicef 2018), it should reach the same,
provided mid-course corrections are made wherever needed and adequate financial
resources allocated by the governments. Chart 5 presents data on mortality rates of
75
3.c: Substantially increase health financing and the recruitment, development, training and
retention of the health workforce in developing countries, especially in least developed countries
and small island developing states.
88 T. C. James
NCDs and Table 4 on suicide mortality rates in India. Chart 5 captures mortality
caused by road traffic accidents. The map at Fig. 1 gives a visual idea of the
distribution of road accident intensity across the states. Kerala, the leading state in
other indicators has very high intensity in road accidents, pointing to the need for
diversified approach across the country.
Sub-National level performance: India is a country with many states whose
health achievements vary greatly owing to various historical and other reasons.
The NITI Aayog has come out with SDG Index for the States. It, however, has
selected 5 indicators only (Maternal Mortality Ratio, Under-five mortality rate,
percentage of children immunised, tuberculosis cases and number of government
physicians, nurses and midwives per one lakh population) for the Index. In the
Baseline Report 2018, it has ranked the index score of States. As per this, the nine
states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Punjab, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,
Manipur, West Bengal and Goa and the UT of Puducherry have been ranked as
front runners and Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra Haryana, Odisha, Jammu &
Kashmir, Mizoram, Tripura, Gujarat, Meghalaya and Sikkim and the UTs of
Lakshadweep, Andaman & Nicobar Islands as performers in SDG 3. The rest are
aspirants. Some of the conclusions highlighted in the report are illuminating:
• Maternal Mortality Ratio: Kerala, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu have already
achieved the target of 70 per lakh by 2030 with MMR 46, 61 and 66 per lakh
respectively.
• Under-Five Mortality Rate: Kerala has already achieved the target of 11 per
thousand by 2030, and Goa and Andaman & Nicobar Islands are nearing the
target.
• Immunisation Coverage: Against a target of 100% immunisation coverage, the
country has already achieved 62% with Punjab at 89% among states and
Puducherry at 91% among UTs leading.
• Tuberculosis Incidence: The national target is to eradicate TB by 2025. As per
the Index, Tripura has the lowest incidence at 44 cases per one lakh population.
• Health Workforce: The national average of government health service personnel
is 221 per one lakh population. Kerala is having a rate of 762 and Delhi 344
health workers per 1 lakh population. The rest of the states have to do much
catching up in health workforce, especially in rural areas.
What comes out of the analysis is that the states with large populations have to
devote more time and resources for health care. The Index can create a sense of
healthy competition among the states to achieve the SDG targets.
Tackling NCDs requires convergence of plans by different departments. Many of
them like cardiac problems and cancer are lifestyle diseases and the result of the
prevailing economic model based on expanding the consumer market has much to do
with it. Industries are most often the cause of increasing environmental pollution
leading to growing number of respiratory ailments. Efforts to reduce road accidents
and fatalities involve a number of agencies like departments of road transport, public
works, police, and, of course, health. Concerted action by all is the way forward.
Achievement of Health for All is dependent on the financial affordability of

health care and the target of the country is to have 100 percent coverage of all
households through health insurance or a health scheme. At present, the states of
Andhra Pradesh (74.60%), Chhattisgarh (68.50%), Telangana (66.40%), Tamil
Nadu (64.10%), Arunachal Pradesh (58.30%) and Tripura (58.10%) only have
crossed the midway mark even. At the other end of the spectrum are states like
Manipur (3.60%), Jammu & Kashmir (4.20%), Nagaland (6.10%) and Uttar
Pradesh (6.10%) with less than 10% coverage, pointing to the big gap to be
bridged.76 With the newly launched Ayushman Bharat scheme the majority are
expected to be provided health coverage in the next couple of years.
Overall, the states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Punjab, Karnataka, Andhra
Pradesh, Manipur, West Bengal, and Goa are proceeding well towards SDG 3,
whereas the states of Uttar Pradesh, Assam, Nagaland, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh,
Arunachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Bihar, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan have to increase
their pace in implementation for India to achieve the targets (NITI Aayog 2018).
7 Conclusion
The progress so far, by and large, keeps pace with the targets, except in certain
areas. For example, deaths due to accidents have not been declining, though the
issue concerns not only health sector but also other sectors like transport. What is
required is development of a more sustainable model which will address the
inter-linkages of health and other sectors. In order to address the issue of inclusive
development, more public health infrastructure and more holistic health insurance
with wider coverage is needed.
India is home to robust indigenous systems of medicine like Ayurveda, Siddha and
Unani, with well-developed pharmacopeia, medical education and industry. These
systems are well suited to the concept of wellness. The systems could be well integrated
with the general health care that will ensure wider coverage of health care, more
inclusiveness and affordability. In order to get it on equal footing, the medical insurance
schemes should cover the AYUSH streams also. Such mid-course corrections will
ensure that India will achieve its health targets on time and with better quality.
Use of technologies in the provision of health care can go a long way. The
Government and the NHP-2017 have been speaking about e-health and digital
health technologies. They need to be translated from the policy to the field with
convergence of policies, programmes and players from different fields like telecom,
health, pharmaceutical industry, etc.
76
NITI Aayog SDG India Index accessed on 23 January 2019 from https://sdgindiaindex.
socialcops.com/YuJbcq9d44/state-ut-ranking/basic#3/23.00/81.26.
90 T. C. James
What one finds is that we have comprehensive and strong policy frameworks
and well-conceived programmes for achievement of universal health care.
However, there are fault lines at the field level implementation for various reasons
including resource constraints and governance problems. The vast and diverse
experience that the country has gained during the last few decades and the regular
and constant monitoring of the schemes and programmes which have been enabled
by the new technologies should go a long way in hastening its progress towards
achievement of the goal of health and wellness for all.
Annexure
See Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4; Charts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; Fig. 1.
Table 1 Comparative Health Profile of India and the World

Incidence of Maternal Neo-Natal Incidence of
Life Expectancy Infant Mortality
Tuberculosis Mortality Rate Mortality HIV
Year India World India World India World India World India World India World
2000 62.6 67.7 289.0 173.0 66.7 53.6 374.0 341.0 45.1 30.6 0.5 0.8
2001 63.0 68.0 288.0 173.0 64.4 51.9 354.0 332.0 43.7 29.7 0.5 0.8
2002 63.4 68.2 287.0 173.0 62.2 50.1 335.0 322.0 42.2 28.8 0.5 0.8
2003 63.8 68.5 285.0 172.0 60.0 48.3 316.0 310.0 40.8 27.8 0.4 0.8
2004 64.2 68.9 282.0 171.0 57.8 46.6 298.0 299.0 39.4 26.9 0.4 0.8
2005 64.6 69.1 279.0 170.0 55.7 44.9 280.0 288.0 38.1 26.0 0.4 0.8
2006 65.0 69.5 274.0 167.0 53.7 43.2 265.0 277.0 36.8 25.1 0.4 0.8
2007 65.4 69.8 268.0 165.0 51.6 41.6 250.0 268.0 35.6 24.3 0.3 0.7
2008 65.8 70.1 261.0 162.0 49.5 40.1 237.0 258.0 34.4 23.6 0.3 0.7
2009 66.2 70.4 254.0 160.0 47.4 38.6 225.0 254.0 33.2 22.8 0.3 0.7
2010 66.6 70.7 247.0 156.0 45.3 37.2 215.0 246.0 32.0 22.1 0.3 0.7
2011 67.0 71.0 241.0 154.0 43.2 35.8 206.0 237.0 30.8 21.4 0.3 0.7
2012 67.4 71.2 234.0 151.0 41.1 34.5 197.0 232.0 29.6 20.8 0.3 0.8
2013 67.7 71.5 228.0 148.0 39.1 33.3 189.0 226.0 28.4 20.1 0.2 0.8
2014 68.0 71.7 223.0 145.0 37.2 32.2 181.0 221.0 27.2 19.6 0.2 0.8
2015 68.3 71.9 217.0 142.0 35.3 31.2 174.0 216.0 26.1 19.0 0.2 0.8
2016 68.6 72.0 211.0 140.0 33.6 30.3 130.0* - 25.0 18.5 0.2 0.8
2017 - - - - 32.0 29.4 - - 24.0 18.0 0.2 0.8
Notes The Red, Yellow and Green colour scheme denotes movement of indicators from worse to
better
Source Databank, the World Bank Data, Online at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.
LE00.IN
Table 2 Average medical and other related non-medical expenditure per hospitalisation for each
quintile class of UMPCE
Quintile class of UMPCE Average expenditure during stay at hospital
Medical Other Total
Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban
1 10,146 11,199 1658 1317 11,805 12,516
2 11,276 14,533 1791 1620 13,067 16,153
3 10,326 17,926 1766 1772 12,092 19,697
4 13,482 24,776 1879 2131 15,361 26,907
5 21,293 42,675 2458 2743 23,752 45,418
All 14,935 24,436 2021 2019 16,956 26,455
Notes UMPCE refers to Usual Monthly per capita Consumer Expenditure, Source NSS KI
(71/25.0): Key Indicators of Social Consumption in India: Health. P.20
Table 3 India’s progress towards health-related SDG-2030 child health indicators and commu-
nicable diseases
Indicator Trend 2015 2016 2017 Target

Neo-Natal Actual 26.1 25 24
12
Mortality Rate Required 26.1 25.16 24.22
Under-five Actual 44.1 41.6 39.4
25
Mortality Rate Required 44.1 42.83 41.55
Incidence of Actual 217.00 211.00 204.00
43.40
Tuberculosis Required 217.00 205.43 193.85
Incidence of Actual 18.8 18.3

1.88
Malaria Required 18.8 17.672 16.544
Note Green row indicates targets being met and orange row indicates targets being missed for the
particular indicators
Sources 1. World Bank Open Data, Online at: https://data.worldbank.org/
2. Global Health Observatory data repository, Worth Health Organisation. Online at: http://apps.
who.int/gho/data/node.imr
Table 4 Suicide mortality Year Age-standardised suicide rates (per

rate in India 100,000 population)
Both sexes Male Female
2016 16.5 18.5 14.5
2015 16.7 18.8 14.7
2010 17.1 19.1 15.1
Source Global Health Repository, WHO
92 T. C. James
Chart 1 State-wise infant mortality rate. (1) The red dashed line represents national averages for
the respective indicator. Source Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
Health and Family Welfare Statistics in India 2017
Chart 2 State-wise life expectancy in India. (1) The red dashed line represents national averages
for the respective indicator. Source Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare,
Health and Family Welfare Statistics in India 2017
Chart 3 State-wise Under-Five mortality rates in India. (1) The red dashed line represents
national averages for the respective indicator. Source Government of India, Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare, Health and Family Welfare Statistics in India 2017
Chart 4 State-wise maternal mortality rates in India. (1) The red dashed line represents national
averages for the respective indicator. Source Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare, Health and Family Welfare Statistics in India 2017
94 T. C. James
Mortality caused by
25
road traffic injury

20
15
10
5
0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Target
Chart 5 Mortality caused by road traffic accidents in India Source World Bank Open Data,
Online at: https://data.worldbank.org/
Fig. 1 State-wise distribution of Road Accidents per Lakh population in 2016 Notes (1) Accidents in
Goa, originally at 217.7, capped at 120. (2) Andra Pradesh includes Telangana. Source Ministry of
Road Transport and Highways, retrieved from: https://data.gov.in
References
Arokiasamy, P. (2018). India’s escalating burden of non-communicable diseases. The Lancet, 6.

Chaturvedi, S., Ladikas, M., Guo, L., & Srinivas,K. R. (Eds.). (2014). The living tree: Traditional
medicine and public health in China and India. New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
Deloitte Centre for Health Solutions. (2018). Unlocking R&D productivity measuring the return
from pharmaceutical innovation 2018. Deloitte.
De, U. K., et al. (Eds.). (2018). Issues on health and healthcare in India: Focus on the north
eastern region. Singapore: Springer.
Dreze, J. (2016). Social policy. New Delhi: Orient BlackSwan. ISBN 978-81-250-6284-4.
Ganesan, L., & Veena, R. S. (2018). ‘Make in India’ for healthcare sector in India: A SWOT
analysis on current status and future prospects. International Journal of Health Sciences &
Research, 8(2), 258–265. ISSN: 2249-9571.
Girish Kumar, R. (2017). Globalisation and India’s innovation systems: A creative destruction?.
Kottayam: Mahatma Gandhi University.
Government of India (GoI), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoH&FW). (2017). Situation
analysis: Backdrop to the National Health Policy-2017. Available at https://mohfw.gov.in/
sites/default/files/71275472221489753307.pdf.
GoI, MoHF&W. (2017a). National Heath Policy-2017. Available at https://mohfw.gov.in/sites/
default/files/9147562941489753121.pdf.
GoI, MoHF&W, National Health Systems Resource Centre. (2017b). National health accounts
estimates for India 2014–15. Retrieved from https://mohfw.gov.in/sites/default/files/National%
20Health%20Accounts%20Estimates%20Report%202014-15.pdf.
GoI, MoHF, &W. (2014). New pathways new hope: National mental health policy of India. GoI,
New Delhi.
Gupta, J., & Vegelin, C. (2016). Sustainable development goals and inclusive development.
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 16. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10784-016-9323-z.
Hegde, B. M. (2014). What Doctors don’t get to study in medical school. Hyderabad, New Delhi:
Paras Medical Publisher. ISBN 978-81-8191-419-4.
India State-Level Disease Burden Initiative Air Pollution Collaborators. (2018). The impact of air
pollution on deaths, disease burden, and life expectancy across the states of India: the Global
Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Planet Health 2018. Accessed on December 15, 2018 at
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/.
James, T. C. (2016). ‘Health for all by 2030: An Indian perspective’ in RIS (210-16) India and
sustainable development goals: The Way Forward. Chapter 3, pp. 23–42. New Delhi: RIS.
James, T. C. (2017). Common health challenges and prospects for cooperation in BRICS.
In S. Saran (Ed.), A decade of BRICS: Indian perspectives for the future (pp. 56–71). New
Delhi: ORF.
Khasru, S. M. (Ed.). (2017). Towards sustainable development: Lessons from MDGs & pathway
for SDGs. Dhaka: IPAG.
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. (2019). Sustainable development goals
national indicator framework baseline report, 2015-16. Available at mospi.nic.in/sites/default/
files/publication…/SDG_Baseline_report_4.3.2019_0.pdf.
Murthy, R. S. (2017). National Mental Health Survey of India 2015–2016. Indian Journal of
Psychiatry, 59(1), 21–26.
National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences. (2016). National Mental Health Survey of
India, 2015-16: Prevalence, pattern and outcomes. ISBN 81-86478-00-X
NITI Aayog. (2018). SDG India index: Baseline report 2018. New Delhi: NITI Aayog.
Patwardhan, B., Mutalik, G., & Tillu, G. (2015). Integrative approaches for health: Biomedical
research, Ayurveda and Yoga. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-12-801281-6.
96 T. C. James
Priya, R., & Shweta, A. S. (2010). Status and role of AYUSH and local health traditions under the
National Rural Health Mission. New Delhi: National Heath Systems Resource Centre. ISBN
978-81-908725-4-6.
Prinja, S., et al. (2018). Health technology assessment for policy making in India: Current scenario
and way forward. Pharmaco Economics, 2, 1–3. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-017-
0037-0.
Rao K. S. (2017). Do we care: India’s health system. Oxford University Press, New Delhi. ISBN:
978-0-19-946954-3
Research and Information System for Developing Countries. (2016). India and Sustainable
Development Goals: The Way Forward. New Delhi.
Sagayam, M. S., Menon, A. S., & Babu, S. (2018). Enhancing the quality of processes in
healthcare in India. 1986–1992. https://doi.org/10.1109/icacci.2018.8554924.
Sankaranarayanan, G. (2014). The constitution of India. Lucknow: Eastern Book Company.
Srivastava, A. K., Semwal, J., Deepshikha, Vyas, S., & Juyal, R. (2016). Extent of awareness and
prevalence of adulteration in selected food items in rural Dehradun. Indian Journal of
Community Health, 28(3), 242–247.
Sundar, D. K., Garg, S., & Garg, I. (Ed.). (2015). Public health in India: Technology, governance
and service delivery. Routledge.
UNDP, Sustainable Development Goals, booklet web version available at http://www.undp.org/
content/dam/undp/library/corporate/brochure/SDGs_Booklet_Web_En.pdf.
Unicef. (2018). Levels and Trends in Child Mortality Report 2018. Unicef.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. (2018). Achieving the
sustainable development goals in south Asia: Key policy priorities and implementation
challenges. New Delhi: UNESCAP. ISBN 978-92-1-120746-0.
United Nations High Level Political Forum. (2017). Voluntary National Review Report on the
Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals: India. Available at https://
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/15836India.pdf.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
A/Res/70/. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%
20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf
United Nations. (2016). Good health and well-being: Why it matters. Retrieved last January 15,
2019 from https://www.who.int/health_financing/en/how_much_should_dp_03_2.pdf.
United Nations. (2017). The sustainable development goals report 2017. New York.
Wada Na Todo Abhiyan. (2017). Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030 India 2017: A
Civil Society Report. New Delhi: Wada Na Todo Abhiyan.
World Health Organisation (WHO). (2003). How much should countries spend on health. Geneva.
WHO, Regional Office for South-East Asia. (2012). WHO country cooperation strategy: India
2012-2017. World Health Organization. Regional Office for South-East Asia. http://www.who.
int/iris/handle/10665/161136
WHO. (2016a). Report of the Joint Monitoring Mission Revised National Tuberculosis Control
Programme 2015, WHO India, New Delhi.
World Health Organisation. (2016b). Health in the Sustainable Development Goals: Where are we
now in the South-East Asia Region? What Next? ISBN 978-92-9022-521-8. New Delhi: WHO
Regional Office for South-East Asia.
Chapter 5
Integrated Development and Sustainable
Cities: Need for an Alternative
Development Paradigm
Amitabh Kundu
Abstract The paper begins by analysing the large city centric perspective of
urbanisation at the global and national level and presents its inadequacies to handle
the emergent problems. It looks at the recent trend of urbanisation in India and the
major departure it makes from the scenario projected at global and national level. It
shows how the dynamics of development has shifted away from large cities to their
suburban and rural peripheries as also to distant areas, leading to emergence of a
large number of small towns. It then goes on to analyse the policies and pro-
grammes in the country for urban development, with an emphasis on the current
missions, identifying the areas of concern in the context of meeting the SDG 11.
The next section overviews restructuring of urban governance and financial insti-
tutions, empowerment of local bodies, changed perspective for preparing and
implementing city-level plans, emergence of new mechanisms of resource mobi-
lization etc. in the context of large city centric urbanisation. Attempt is made to
assess if these are in conformity with the requirements of SDG 11. The UN
institutional architecture for target setting, specification of indicators and moni-
toring the progress with regard to SDG 11 is discussed briefly. The same has been
attempted at national level, highlighting the deficiencies in the existing system,
assessing the progress made and identifying the areas of concern. Finally, the
problems and possibilities of launching a proactive strategy of integrated and
sustainable urban developement have been presented.
Keywords Urbanisation City planning Infrastructure
Contribution of Ms. Deepanshi Singh, an intern at RIS, in preparing the draft for the sections on
organisational structure for implementing and monitoring the SDGs at global and national level
is acknowledged.
A. Kundu (&)
(RIS), Lodhi Road, 110003 New Delhi, India
e-mail: amitabh.kundu@ris.org.in

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_5
98 A. Kundu
1 Introduction
The Sustainable Development Goal 11, postulating territorially balanced develop-

ment across all human settlements, covering different dimensions of sustainability,
and thus having a high degree of interrelations with other SDGs, firmly places
urbanisation at the forefront of international development policy. This is more so
when this is considered along with the New Urban Agenda (NUA) and within the
Sendai Framework. It has been argued that urban areas provide the strings that
connect most of the SDGs since more than half of them have an urban component.
Understandably, many countries consider the New Urban Agenda and the Sendai
Framework as key drivers and enablers for achieving several urban-related SDG
targets.1
An overview of the proposed list of targets for SDG 11 suggests three major
shifts from the contemporary paradigm of urban development (Table 1). One,
greater emphasis is given on environmental and social dimensions of urbanisation
rather than on economic efficiency and cities being envisaged merely as engines of
growth. Sustainability and resilience of the development process, provisioning of
housing, basic amenities, health and transport services, natural and cultural spaces,
etc., have been brought into the core agenda. Two, there is sharper focus on
integrated and inclusive planning, giving due emphasis on the needs of vulnerable
population. And, three, the need for strengthening linkages between urban,
peri-urban and rural areas through integrated and sustainable human settlement
planning, following a participatory approach has been underlined. The urban cen-
tres are envisioned to be in the centre stage not only in the context of the well-being
of the urban population but also for meeting the regional, national and global targets
and addressing many of the persistent challenges including climate change, pro-
visioning of basic amenities and balanced regional development.
Given this macro context, the section following the present Introduction, anal-
yses the large city centric perspective of urbanisation at the global and national level
and presents its inadequacies to handle the emergent problems. The third section
looks at the current trend of urbanisation in India and the major departure it makes
from the scenario anticipated at global and national level. It shows how the
dynamics of development has shifted way from large cities to their suburban and
rural peripheries as also to distant areas, leading to emergence of a large number of
small towns. The fourth section analyses the policies and programmes in the
country for urban development, with an emphasis on the current missions, identi-
fying the areas of concern in the context of meeting the SDG 11. The next section
overviews restructuring of urban governance and financial institutions,
1
In the Synthesis Report entitled “Tracking Progress Towards Inclusive, Safe, Resilient and
Sustainable Cities and Human Settlements”, submitted to High Level Political Forum 2018, Ms.
Maimunah Mohd Sharif, Executive Director, UN-Habitat , emphasizes “the complementary and
interlinked nature of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Declaration, the
New Urban Agenda and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction”.
5 Integrated Development and Sustainable Cities: Need for … 99
Table 1 Targets, centrally sponsored and central sector schemes in India along with their
concerned ministries for SDG 11
SDG Targets Centrally Sponsored/Central Concerned Ministries/
Sector Schemes (CSS) Departments
11.1 By 2030, ensure access 1. Pradhan Mantri Awas Housing and Urban
for all to adequate, safe and Yojana (PMAY)-Urban Affairs (HUA)
affordable housing and basic 2. Atal Mission for
services and upgrade slums Rejuvenation and Urban
Transformation (AMRUT)
3. Smart Cities Mission
4. Pradhan Mantri Awas Rural Devel (RD)
Yojana (PMAY)-Rural
11.2 By 2030, provide access 1. Atal Mission for Housing and Urban Affairs
to safe, affordable, accessible Rejuvenation and Urban
and sustainable transport Transformation (AMRUT)
systems for all, improving 2. Smart Cities Mission
road safety, notably by 3. MRTS and Metro Project
expanding public transport, 4. Bharatmala Pariyojan Road Trans. and Highways
with special attention to the
5. Schemes for Rail Railways
needs of those in vulnerable
Infrastructure Dev
situations, women, children,
persons with disabilities and 6. S P Mukherjee RURBAN RD
older persons Mission
11.3 By 2030, enhance 1. Atal Mission for HUA
inclusive and sustainable Rejuvenation and Urban
urbanisation and capacity for Transformation (AMRUT)
participatory, integrated and 2. Smart Cities Mission
sustainable human settlement 3. Swachh Bharat Mission
planning and management in
all countries
11.4 Strengthen efforts to 1. Kala Sanskriti Vikas Culture
protect and safeguard the Yojana
world’s cultural and natural 2. National Heritage City
heritage Development and
Augmentation Yojana
(HRIDAY)
11.5 By 2030, significantly 1. Infrastructure of Disaster Home Affairs
reduce the number of deaths Management
and the number of people 2. National Cyclone Risk
affected and substantially Mitigation Project (NCRMP)
decrease the direct economic 3. Other Disaster
losses relative to global gross Management Schemes
domestic product caused by 4. Flood Management and Water Resources, River
disasters, including Border Areas Programme Development and Ganga
water-related disasters, with a Rejuvenation (M0WR, RD
focus on protecting the poor and GR)
and people in vulnerable
5. Development of Water Earth Sciences
situations
Resources Information
System
6. Atmosphere and Climate
Research—Modelling,
(continued)
100 A. Kundu
Table 1 (continued)
Observing Systems and
Services (ACROSS)
7. Ocean Services,
Technology, Observations,
Resources, Modelling and
Science (OSTORMS)
8. Seismology and
Geosciences (SAGE)
9. Design and Development Space
of Applications for EO,
Communication, Disaster
Management, etc.
11.6 By 2030, reduce the 1. Atal Mission for HUA
adverse per capita Rejuvenation and Urban
environmental impact of Transformation (AMRUT)
cities, including by paying 2. Smart Cities Mission
special attention to air quality 3. Swachh Bharat
and municipal and other Mission-Urban
waste management 4. Environment Protection, Ministry of Environment,
Management and Sustainable Forest and Climate Change
Development (MoEF and CC)
11.7 By 2030, provide 1. Atal Mission for HUA
universal access to safe, Rejuvenation and Urban
inclusive and accessible, Transformation (AMRUT)
green and public spaces, in
particular for women and
children, older persons and
persons with disabilities
11.a Support positive 1. Shyama Prasad RD
economic, social and Mukherjee RURBAN
environmental links between Mission
urban, peri-urban and rural 2. North Eastern Regional HUA
areas by strengthening Urban Development Project
national and regional (NERUDP) and other projects
development planning in the North Eastern Region
3. Rastriya Gram Swaraj Panchayati Raj
Abhiyan (RGSA)
11.b By 2020, substantially 1. Atal Mission for HUA
increase the number of cities Rejuvenation and Urban
and human settlements Transformation (AMRUT)
adopting and implementing 2. Infrastructure of Disaster Home Affairs
integrated policies and plans Management
towards inclusion, resource 3. National Cyclone Risk
efficiency, mitigation and Mitigation Project (NCRMP)
(continued)
Table 1 (continued)
adaptation to climate change, 4. Other Disaster
resilience to disasters, and Management Schemes
develop and implement, in 5. Flood Management and MoWR, RD and GR
line with the Sendai Border Areas Programme
Framework for Disaster Risk 6. Development of Water
Reduction 2015–2030, Resources Information
holistic disaster risk System
management at all levels
7. Atmosphere and Climate Earth Sciences
Research—Modelling,
Observing Systems and
Services (ACROSS)
8. Ocean Services,
Technology, Observations,
Resources, Modelling and
Science (OSTORMS)
9. Seismology and
Geosciences (SAGE)
10. Design and Development Space
of Applications for EO,
Communication, Disaster
Management, etc.
11.c Support least developed Finance, External Affairs
countries, including through
financial and technical
assistance, in building
sustainable and resilient
buildings utilising local
materials
empowerment of local bodies, changed perspective for preparing and implementing

city-level plans, emergence of new mechanisms of resource mobilisation, etc., in
the context of large city centric urbanisation. Attempt is made here to assess if all
these are in conformity with the requirements of SDG 11. The UN institutional
architecture for target setting, specification of indicators and monitoring the pro-
gress with regard to SDG 11 is discussed in the sixth section. The next section
attempts the same at national level, assesses the progress made, identifies the areas
of concern and brings out the deficiencies in the existing system in India. The key
results along with the problems and possibilities of adopting a proactive strategy for
integrated and sustainable urbanisation are presented in the last section.
102 A. Kundu
2 City Centric Analysis of Urbanisation: Perspectives

and Emerging Reality
Projections by UN system as also global development-cum-banking agencies

suggest that India, along with China, will lead the world economic recovery in the
next couple of decades. India will register a growth rate of about 7% per annum in
GDP in real terms. A critical assumption underlying the models giving the pro-
jections is that the country will experience rapid urban growth in coming years, as
noted above. Many of the policy documents of the World Bank as also the Asian
Development Bank claim that the epicenter of urbanisation is likely to shift to Asia
and that an urban avalanche would hit India. The process of urbanisation is
implicitly or explicitly linked to metropolitan cities (with population above a mil-
lion) that account for on an average about 70% of the urban population in the Asian
countries. The urban world has, thus, been analysed through the perspective of a
few metropolitan cities, envisaged in competition with each other.
Scholars have posited a thesis of urban explosion in Asia and argued that ‘the
fulcrum of urban growth’ is shifting dramatically towards this continent—away from
Africa and Latin America. With the ‘mean latitude of global urban population
moving steadily to the south’ (Mohan and Dasgupta 2005), India has been consid-
ered a major contributor to the urban explosion because of both its large demo-
graphic weight and high rate of urbanisation. Stylised facts—such as the increase in
the number of 10-million-plus cities in India from zero in 1950 to three by the turn of
the century and its share in the world urban population rising from the present 10 to
14% in 2050—are noted as evidence of ‘unprecedented urban growth’ in India.
The Population Division of the United Nations (UNPD) had alerted that the
global urban population will touch 50% level by 2006–07. With some hiccups, this
was finally achieved but only in 2009. The delay was due to the actual growth of
urban population in the developing world, particularly India, turning out to be less
than what was projected.2 This is due to Euro-zone crisis and global economic
slowdown, dampening the momentum of metropolis based urbanisation in
less-developed countries in Asia. Addressing the Bretton Woods Committee, the
Managing Director of the World Bank, Mulyani Indrawati (World Bank 2016)
shared this concern while arguing that the ‘Developing and emerging economies
that were engines of growth during the last decade, continue to underperform…..
Commodity-exporting emerging market and developing economies, many of them
home to millions of poor people, have been hit very hard’. Despite these problems,
the dominant paradigm has been city-based urbanisation and the solutions pre-
scribed were higher infrastructural investment in select cities of the developing
countries and through them to link their economies to global market.
The World Bank Report (2015a, b) entitled ‘Leveraging Urbanization in South
Asia: Managing Spatial Transformation for Prosperity and Livability’ postulates
2
Kundu (2019).
that one big reason why its ‘urbanization has been messy and hidden’ is the
‘widespread existence of slums and sprawl…. particularly on the peripheries of
major cities, which is not captured by official statistics. Messy and hidden urban-
isation is symptomatic of the failure to adequately address congestion constraints’
Following the trail, Annette Dixon, the Vice President for the South Asia Region of
the World Bank argues that the region must rethink its strategy and undertake
reforms to tap into the unrealised potential of the cities. He argues that if managed
well, ‘city based urbanisation can lead to sustainable growth by increasing pro-
ductivity, meeting the deficits in provisioning of basic amenities and, at the same
time, reducing resource consumption and carbon emissions’.
Urbanisation process in India since Independence has indeed been in favour of
metropolitan and large cities. The percentage of urban population in million-plus
cities here is higher than in most other large countries of the world and has gone up
relatively faster in the five decades since Independence. The share of cities with
population above 5 million to total urban population is 24%, compared to the global
average of 17% only. An increasing concentration of urban population in Class I
cities (those with population above 100,000) can also be observed in their per-
centage share (in total urban population)going up from 26 in 1901 to over 70 in
2011. This has often been attributed, and rightly so, to the faster growth of large
cities. However, the other factor responsible for increasing dominance of these
cities is the graduation of lower order towns into the Class I and metropolitan
category, without a corresponding increase in the number of smaller towns.
A review of the process of urbanisation as also evolution of urban policies and
programmes in India indicates that they have undergone significant changes during
the past two-and-a-half decades. Planners and researchers here have started looking at
urban processes mostly through a prism of large cities. The main body of urban
research in the past few decades, has, therefore, been focused on large cities, as is the
case in Global South. Urban structure is envisioned through or in comparison with a
set of global cities, and, more recently, smart cities that can compete with the iconic
megalopolises of New York, London, Paris and Shanghai. The key concern has been
how to design infrastructure and public services, supported by modern technology in
select cities, so as to attract capital from within and outside the country for realising
agglomeration economies and transforming them into engines of growth. Several
international agencies explicitly and implicitly proposed that the success of globali-
sation and livelihood strategy in India would depend on the speed with which modem
production, trading and banking institutions in urban centres can be linked with metro
cities and global values can be injected into the business behaviour of the former.
As the dynamics of urban industrial development was associated with globali-
sation, the small and medium towns, located away from the emerging global centres
of growth, particularly those in backward regions, failed to attract adequate private
investment and even missed the attention of researchers. They found it difficult to
finance any development project through internal resources or borrowing from
capital markets. The fiscal discipline imposed by the Government, banking and
credit-rating agencies made it impossible for them to undertake infrastructural
104 A. Kundu
investment of any kind (High Powered Expert Committee 2011). The resultant
deficiency in basic amenities became a serious handicap for them in attracting
private investment from within or outside the country. The declining governmental
investment in infrastructure and basic amenities in these towns over the years has
contributed to increasing socio-economic disparities within the settlement structure.
3 Trends in Urban Growth in India: Evidence

of a Paradigm Shift
A change in the thrust of urbanisation strategy can be inferred from the projections
of urban growth in Asia in general and India in particular, made by Population
Division of the United Nations (UNPD) in World Urbanization Prospects (WUP) in
1995 and its subsequent revisions. The 2018 Revision of WUP gives much lower
figures, both for urban growth and estimated urban population than those of 1995,
possibly due to the decline in natural increase (births over deaths), reported in the
Sample Registration System in the country (Table 2). In essence, the UNPD admits
Table 2 Annual exponential urban growth and urban rural growth differential (URGD) for India,
1990–2050
WUP 1995 WUP 2004 WUP 2008 WUP 2010 WUP
(1994 (2003 (2007 (2009 (2018
revision) revision) revision) revision) revision)
Urban growth 2.87 2.73 2.88 2.81 2.79
1990–1995
Urban growth 3.04 2.54 2.63 2.58 2.62
1995–2000
Urban growth 3.16 2.28 2.35 2.37 2.76
2000–2005
Urban growth 2.80 2.53 2.60 2.43 2.33
2020–2025
Urban growth NA NA 1.69 1.64 1.54
2045–2050
URGD 1.30 1.10 1.09 1.09 1.10
1990–1995
URGD 1.77 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.07
1995–2000
URGD 2.22 1.07 1.02 1.04 1.54
2000–2005
URGD 3.25 2.63 2.66 2.34 2.13
2020–2025
URGD NA NA 2.94 2.93 2.60
2045–2050
Source UN Population Division (World Urbanisation Prospects, different revisions)
that the growth rate of urban population in India is decelerating at a much faster rate
than anticipated earlier, not only because of decline in natural growth in urban
population but also rural–urban (RU) migration to large cities. All this underlines
the limitations of a city centric perspective of urbanisation and not looking at the
urban system in the context of regional economy.
Policy makers in India have recently questioned the perspective of promoting
large city based intervention as the optimal strategy of development or of urbani-
sation. Documents from the Urban Development Ministry observe creation of new
growth centres around large cities or in distant hinterland as a major challenge. The
Eleventh Five Year Plan, too, recognises this as it admits that ‘the growth of rural
settlements which are acquiring urban characteristics is very slow’ (Planning
Commission 2008). The Twelfth Plan expresses concern about the concentration of
demographic and economic growth in and around a few cities, emphasising the
need to bring about spatially balanced urbanisation by promoting small towns and
new townships. It explicitly underlined the need to support these ‘towns and
expanding villages that have locational or natural resource advantages for future
socio-economic growth. … Such nodes invariably have some in-built advantages,
such as lower cost of land, but at the same time many serious drawbacks, too, such
as poor connectivity and inadequate municipal services. If such issues are addressed
by longer term, and spatially wider urban planning, then both the pace and the
process of urbanization can be improved’ (Planning Commission 2011: 109–110).
The percentage of the urban population in India has gone up gradually from about
11 in 1901 to 17 in 1951 and then to 31 in 2011 (Table 2). The annual exponential
urban growth rate can be seen as rising steadily between 1951 and 1981, after which
it started going down. The highest rate of urban growth (3.83%) was, thus, recorded
during 1971–81, which came down successively to 3.09% in the 1980s, and 2.73%
in the 1990s. The growth rate during 2001–11 works out to be 2.76 %, which is
about the same as in the preceding decade. The rate would have been below 2.5% but
for the identification 2700 new urban centres, which has partly been attributed to
‘Census activism’. Urban growth in India has, thus, been modest in recent decades.
The decomposition of the incremental urban population into components indicates
that there has been a decline in the share of migrants in the existing cities and towns
in recent decades compared to the past. Understandably, the growth rates of Class I
cities and metro (million plus) cities have gone down. The impetus to urban
dynamics has actually come at the lowest level, with an increase in the number of
new towns, as noted above. What is sustaining the overall urban growth is rur-
banisation, a process of rural settlements acquiring urban characteristics while
retaining their rural socio-economic base. These question the theory of ‘urban
explosion’ or ‘over-urbanisation’ based on the large cities and casts serious doubts
on the prospect for rapid urbanisation in future years.
It would be important to rescue urban studies from the paradigm of metropolis
based urbanisation, a paradigm which envisions urban processes in developing world
responding to compulsions of global capital. A large part of contemporary urban
growth is occurring outside of the hegemonic power structure of globalisation.
Therefore, instead of confining urban research to global and national market,
106 A. Kundu
Table 3 Number of towns, and percentage and growth rate of urban population in India, 1901–
2001
Census Number of Urban population (as Annual exponential growth
year towns/urban percentage of total of urban population
areas population)
1901 1827 10.84 –
1911 1815 10.29 0.03
1921 1949 11.18 0.79
1931 2072 11.99 1.75
1941 2250 13.86 2.77
1951 2843 17.29 3.47
1961 2365 17.97 2.34
1971 2590 19.91 3.21
1981 3378 23.34 3.83
1991 3768 25.72 3.09
2001 4368 27.78 2.73
2011 7935 31.16 2.76
state-level institutions, formal programmes, missions, it is important to build a

‘history of urbanisation from below’. It would be a new narrative, constructed
through an analysis of situations and processes that have been considered insignifi-
cant within the framework of metro centric urbanisation. There is an urgent need to
build an alternative macro-economic framework for understanding the Economic
Geography in the country by recognising the process of rurbanisation (Table 3).
One must enquire if the local economic forces and institutional structure are able
to do a functional stage-setting for the global capital, partially outside the depen-
dency framework? Do the diverse territories, constituted through complex web of
rural, peri-urban and urban settlements, that have been sought to be strengthened by
SDG 11 through participatory planning, reflect some form of resilience or robust-
ness of local economic system? Indeed, simple dualistic formulations, postulating
categories such as rural and urban, small and big cities, etc., are inappropriate to
understand the dynamics of urban development. The spatial pattern of development
today is continuously blurring their distinctions and one must focus on the rela-
tionships emerging across settlements in different categories.
Indian urban reality stands up robustly as a refutation of the large city centric
models of explanation and prediction as three diverse processes of urbanisation
manifest on national scene. These are operating (a) in immediate hinterland of large
cities, (b) in small and medium towns and (c) rural settlements exhibiting urban
characteristics, many of these being identified as Census towns. These are not
completely insulated from the functioning of global capital but have their own
dynamics and specificity, emerging from their local economy. These, nonetheless,
provide definite evidence of in-situ urbanisation—expansion of cities into rural
territories and transformation of villages into urban settlements.
3.1 Exclusionary Trends of Large Cities and Degenerated

Peripheralisation
Many among the metropolitan and Class I cities have been exclusionary in character
—not absorbing rural migrants who do not have the suitable skills. The large indus-
tries have got located in neighbouring villages because land, labour and
environment-related problems as also the administrative controls here are less serious.
As a consequence, the growth rate of population in metropolitan cities has gone down
with a corresponding increase of that in the peripheries. What, however, is regrettable
that peripheral rurbanization, a large part of which is driven by people’s struggle for
survival, has received scanty attention in the academic literature and policy planning.
3.2 Dynamism of Small and Medium Towns
Demographic and economic growth rates in several small and medium towns,
having strong RU interdependencies, are very impressive, making a mark on the
national map. A few among them have linkages with their neighbouring large cities
and benefit from the spill-over of industries and, in turn, cater to their requirements.
Others, however, are away from the zones of influence of large cities and owe their
origin and growth to historical and institutional factors at the local level.
3.3 Emergence of New Towns and in Situ Urbanisation
The increase in the number of ‘census towns’ from 1,352 in 2001 to 3,894 in 2011
(Table 2) is unprecedented in the history of Indian Census. There has been a growth
in population and density in several large villages during the past decades that can
rarely be attributed to the developments in the global market. These, unfortunately,
had mostly gone unnoticed by the officials in the Census and urban researchers until
recently. However, as a result of identification of a large number of new towns in
2011, a large section of the country’s urban population now lives in census towns
that are being governed by rural administrative set up. Unfortunately, they have not
been given urban status by their respective state governments. These, therefore,
have very low level of infrastructure and basic amenities that would adversely affect
their future growth as also the overall process of regional and urban development,
unless major interventions are made at central and state level.
The diverse patterns of urbanisation and rurbanisation, as discussed above, put a
question mark on the advocacy of a uniform system of governance as a solution to
urban problems. The economic and demographic growth in these towns must be
supported through specific interventions since, if left to the market forces, it would
take decades for them to be transformed and get linked with the national market.
There is an urgent need to make them ‘a part of India’s future urbanization’.
108 A. Kundu
4 Policies and Programmes for Urban Sector and City

Planning Within the SDG Framework
A review of the evolution of policies and programmes in India’s urban sector at

different levels of governance indicates that they have undergone significant
changes during the past two-and-a-half decades. Nevertheless, the majority among
Indian planners and researchers have analysed urban development and designed the
future strategy through a perspective of large cities, as noted above. Most of these
studies, including the government reports during eighties and nineties, highlighted
the problem of deteriorating infrastructure in large cities.
A perspective of promoting macro-economic growth through urbanisation was
brought in a significant manner in the Ninth Plan (1997–2002) (Planning
Commission 1998). A strategy was proposed based on the principle of market
efficiency, wherein cities were to act as engines of growth. It also put forward a
vision of infrastructural development through private corporate sector participation
and mobilisation of resources from financial institutions and market borrowings,
resulting in substantial reduction in budgetary allocations.
The emphasis on large cities became more focused towards the end of the Tenth
Plan with the launching of Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission
(JNNURM) in a mission mode, designed to address this infrastructural deficiency
(Planning Commission 2003). Massive investment funds were given to state and
city governments as grants. The key objective was to compel the public agencies to
commit themselves to structural reforms, following the failure of the central
Government to achieve this through several carrot-and-stick measures in earlier
missions. Most of the JNNURM projects were designed to increase the total
capacity of services such as water supply, sanitation and sewage treatment, as well
as roads and flyovers at the city level. Although the mission stipulated making the
infrastructure and basic amenities available to the poor, there was neither a definite
clause that could operationalise this at ground level nor an explicit conditionality to
improve the delivery of such facilities in deficient areas that have a low level of
income and affordability. The apprehension that much of the benefits from this
augmentation of capacity of the public amenities were usurped by better-off groups
cannot be dismissed.
The Eleventh Five Year Plan was also aligned to this viewpoint as it stipulated
that cities ‘will be the locus and engine of economic growth over the next two
decades’ for the realisation of ‘an ambitious goal of 9–10% growth in GDP’
(Planning Commission 2008: p. 394). The thrust was on ‘increasing the efficiency
and productivity of cities by deregulation and development of land’ and on making
them ‘much more liveable, inclusive, bankable, and competitive’. It proposed
‘dismantling public sector monopoly over urban infrastructure and creating a con-
ducive atmosphere for the private sector to invest’ (Planning Commission 2008).
The Twelfth Plan, too, pronounced that massive ‘possibilities for
entrepreneurship and employment increase’ exist in urban concentrations and that
‘agglomeration and densification of economic activities (and habitations) in urban
conglomerations stimulates economic efficiencies and provides more opportunities

for earning livelihoods’ (Planning Commission 2013). It underlined the possibility
of accelerating the pace of urbanisation by promoting growth of small and medium
towns, and yet, showed an ambivalent attitude towards investing for their growth.
Its large city bias, nonetheless, manifested unequivocally with the launching of the
smart city mission in 2014 covering 100 large cities. It is important to note that both
JNNURM and smart city mission tried to get the state and city governments to
commit themselves to structural reforms, creation of ground conditions for
market-based macro-economic development and of an appropriate enabling
framework to enhance the creditworthiness of urban institutions. The benefits from
all these were taken primarily by large municipal corporations.
The preparation of city master plans involving an analysis of land-use patterns,
population distribution and location of economic activities—going down to the
zonal or even ward-level information—including the equity, heritage and envi-
ronmental dimensions, that are considered critical for SDG 11, were not mandatory
under the new policy environment for the City Development Plans (CDP), that were
to be prepared for obtaining grants under central sector projects. The Eleventh Plan
document reposed the responsibility of preparing CDPs, under JNNURM—largely
’as vision documents’—to local and state governments. It did stipulate that the CDP
should be based on community participation but in practice the latter became a
matter of window dressing.
Most of the vision documents delineated only the broad contours of develop-
ment strategy, within which the stakeholders were expected to work out the details,
within a participatory framework. Vision documents gave no specific detail on, for
example, the shifting of slums to alternate locations, access to basic amenities by
the poor or their affordability to meet the basic living costs. No definite indicator
was worked out by which the fulfilment of the broad objectives or stipulations can
be monitored, as is envisaged in SDG 11, through specification of a list of indi-
cators for monitoring. This undoubtedly opened the possibility of vested interests to
get identified as stakeholders. Upper and middle class linked civil society organi-
sations became active and vocal, particularly in large cities, struggling to ensure
safety of their members, better delivery of public amenities and more efficient
management of development projects. In the process, the more powerful organi-
sations, mostly in upper and middle-class colonies, worked relentlessly with the
goal of removing encroachments, slums, squatter settlements and petty commercial
establishments that, in their view, posed a threat to local security and hygiene,
resulting in ‘sanitisation’ of their neighbourhoods.
Courts took a serious view of the public interest litigations filed by upper and
middle-class organisations and eminent individuals, and often directed local
authorities to dismantle the undesirable and illegitimate urban growth. Such mea-
sures led to an improvement in the quality of life in many formal colonies but, at the
same time, accentuated disparities in the level of amenities across population
groups within cities. In some sense, traditional class differences and power struc-
tures got reinforced in the process of urban growth, making life difficult for poor
and vulnerable, particularly the new migrants. The slum dwellers inducted into the
110 A. Kundu
exercise of preparing the vision document often played a decorative role, largely
because of their inability to understand the implications of the macro vision.
Shifting of the slum dwellers to distant locations was operationalised sometimes
directly through the eviction of slum dwellers and banning hawkers, pavement
dwellers and rickshaw pullers. However, more often, this was done discreetly
through slum improvement schemes, ‘rehabilitating’ them out in the peripheries.
This certainly is in violation of the perspective of inclusivity built-in the SDG 11.
A case is now being made for larger assistance from the central government to
small towns for addressing the deficiencies in their infrastructure and
revenue-generating capacity through Missions similar to those of JNNURM and
Smart Cities. For doing this, understanding the functioning of local-level institu-
tions for designing effective strategies for policy intervention would be important.
Unfortunately, the S. P. Mukherjee Rurban Mission, designed to address these
issues, have proved to be a non-starter. State must step in to ensure that margin-
alised sections of population, who do not belong to any caste or other social
network and therefore are likely to get excluded from the traditional/informal
institutional set up, are brought into the mainstream. Public interventions could go a
long way in promoting such an inclusive system and strengthening sustainable
urbanisation.
5 Institutional Reforms and New Perspectives

for Financing Urban Development
The Central Government and the Reserve Bank of India have imposed some kind of
‘financial discipline’ on state governments, urban local bodies and financing
institutions in urban sector since the early eighties coinciding with the changes in
the system of urban governance, discussed above. As a result, the local level
programmes and projects came to rely increasingly on internal resources, loans
from development-cum-banking institutions and capital market borrowings at
non-subsidised interest rates.3 Reform measures in land and capital markets were
also introduced, facilitating larger resource mobilisation by state governments and
large cities while adhering to the new policy declarations and administrative
measures. Attempts were also made to obtain greater engagement of private
agencies in the management and future development of city infrastructure and civic
amenities. Public agencies were restructured and several new institutions were
created to assist cities launch their infrastructural projects and undertake develop-
ment responsibilities. The democratic system and bureaucratic inertia in the
country, however, made the process extremely slow.
Players, financing projects in urban sector, were given mandate and autonomy to
mobilise a large part of their resources from the market. Housing and Urban
3
Kundu (2011).
Development Corporation (HUDCO), the major player in the public sector for
proving funds for urban development projects and associated institutional support,
designed a new system in 1989, leading to revision in the terms and conditions of
loans for infrastructure projects. The stipulations for many of these loans were
modified to improve performance and accountability. The cost of borrowing for all
slum improvement projects went up, resulting in reduction of the interest rate
differentiation. Significantly, HUDCO was upgraded to a ‘mini-ratna (small gem)
company’ in August 2004, and, consequently, lost entitlement to any equity support
from the Government. This further reduced its capacity to channel funds to small
towns and social sectors at low interest rates. All these helped mostly the large cities
with strong economic base, in leveraging resources. Also, the volume of social
sector loans, particularly that going to small and medium towns, was drastically cut,
despite loans with substantial subsidy component being available under government
schemes such as that for Integrated Low-Cost Sanitation, targetted to smaller local
bodies4 and poor beneficiaries. The large cities that were attracting private sector
investments from both within and outside the country even earlier, were able to
corner a disproportionate share of the HUDCO funds.
Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services (ILFS), established in 1989,
emerged as an important financial institution. Its major responsibility was develop-
ment of industrial townships, roads and highways, where risks are comparatively low.
With the increasing dependence on funds from the private sector and capital markets,
the importance of the ILFS grew over time for ensuring projects with financial
viability that safeguarded the interests of investors. Its basic objectives were to assist
local bodies, para-statal agencies and private organisations, strengthen their capacity
to prepare feasibility reports for infrastructure projects, design pricing and cost
recovery mechanisms and establish joint venture companies called Special Purpose
Vehicles. It became an equity holder in these companies along with other public and
private agencies, including the Build Operate and Transfer projects. Its contribution
to the total financing of infrastructure in India, however, is recognised more as that of
a merchant banker rather than a loan provider. Over time, it has become ‘a promoter
of a new perspective of development’ (Kundu 2001). A major criticism of ILFS,
however, is that it generally does not support the projects designed for provisioning
basic amenities in slums or low-income areas that do not have clear stipulations for
total cost recovery and, therefore, are not attractive for private or joint-sector
companies. Unfortunately, the company has piled up too much debt to be paid back
in the short-term while revenues from its assets are skewed towards the longer term.
This inability to service its obligation has got it currently into a serious crisis.
USAID’s Financial Institutions Reform and Expansion–Debt and Infrastructure
(FIRE-D) activity, partnered with India’s central, state, and municipal governments
4
For urban centres with less than half a million population, the rate was 14.5% , for cities with
population of 0.5–1.0 million, it was 17% ; and for million-plus cities, it was 18% . No special
concessional rate was charged, however, for the towns of less than 100,000 or 50,000 that are in
dire need of infrastructural improvement, as discussed above. These provisions no longer exist in
HUDCO, which has adopted a needs-based approach and a uniform policy.
112 A. Kundu
during (1994–2011), with the objective of expanding sustainable water and sani-
tation facilities for the poor, while improving the ability of city and state govern-
ments to mobilise resources, represented a landmark in implementing the
new reform Agenda. It was stipulated that the funds made available to local bodies
under its Programme, and provided through ILFS and even HUDCO will be
matched by an equal amount, raised from domestic debt market. Such partnership
arrangements were built under a mandatory agenda of policy reform pertaining to
urban governance, land management and the pricing of services. Similarly, for
obtaining World Bank loans under International Development Assistance, the
requirement was for the ULBs to maintain a separate account for the project
facilities, outside the overall municipal budget. This, in a certain sense, made the
project independent of the general municipal budget. Understandably, this frag-
mentation of the budget limited the capacity of local bodies to undertake capital and
even current expenditure out of their own revenues.
The establishment of Infrastructure Development Finance Company in early
1997, registered with Reserve Bank of India, as a non-banking financial company,
was hailed as a landmark initiative. It played an important role in channelling
central Government and HUDCO funds to local bodies, to augment their infras-
tructural investment. Funds were provided to local bodies for their bankable pro-
jects through its Urban Reform Incentive Fund as an incentive to adopt the reform
measures and to ensure a necessary comfort level for the financial institutions,
lending to the local bodies. This scheme was later subsumed in JNNURM.
Loans were provided directly to municipalities and other local and state-level
agencies, and indirectly through financial organisations by the Life Insurance
Corporation of India, similar to those of HUDCO, for infrastructure development.
Unfortunately, its format of funding local bodies was not very popular since it
entailed substantial contributions from the borrowing organisations. Besides, there
were serious problems in recovery of its dues (Rao 1999).
Another important development in the context of investment in infrastructure
and amenities was the emergence of credit-rating institutions. As the financial
markets became globally competitive and the borrowers’ base got diversified,
investors and regulators preferred to rely on the judgment of credit-rating institu-
tions or other intermediaries for their investment decisions. Institutions such as the
Information and Credit Rating Agency of India, Credit Analysis and Research and
Credit Rating Information Services of India Limited emerged at the national scene
for rating the debt instruments of corporate bodies including ULBs.
A few of the large cities were able to mobilise resources through tax-free bonds,
debentures and structured debt obligations, with assistance from the credit-rating
agencies, noted above. The instruments were designed so as to mandate the bor-
rowing agencies pledge or place their physical assets and/or certain buoyant sources
of revenue (such as the octroi tax or grants from the state) into an escrow account
for debt servicing. This is a mechanism which kept the debt independent of the
overall financial position of the borrowing agency. It ensured that a trustee oversees
the debt servicing process and the borrowing agencies are not allowed to have
access to the pledged resources until the loan is repaid.
It is not easy for any rating agency to assess the economic strength and long term
growth potential of a city through a select set of indicators and an overview of its
financial, legal and administrative jurisdiction. The rating institutions often process
the raw data obtained from the concerned local bodies and compute the relevant
decision making ratios in a way which is not very transparent. They also bring in
their own qualitative assessment into the rating system which is defended on the
ground that the local bodies can manipulate their accounts and other quantitative
information, since their budgets in India are not prepared within a standard format.
Many among the development agencies and macro-level planners are indeed
unhappy and extremely critical with the methodology for aggregation of the
quantitative and qualitative information for final grading of the projects. The rating
agencies are accused of being biased and of propagating a specific development
perspective in India through a pseudo-scientific methodology.
The projects financed through the arrangements discussed above were generally
high in terms of commercial viability, ensuring profitability for the investors and
other stakeholders. This led to situations whereby the finances from the general
budget, collected as direct and indirect taxes from the city population, got escrowed
as security for projects, designed to benefit upper and middle-class colonies and
more affluent sections of population. Similarly, the control and management of
certain revenue channels by an outside financial institution or trustee, have been
questioned as an infringement of the rights of local bodies. When the projects failed
to generate profits to repay investors, the overall financial situation of the local
bodies got jeopardised, forcing them to compromise on providing universal access
to facilities and the principle of inclusive planning. Indeed, the computational
methodology will have to be very different, if the concerns for sustainability and
inclusiveness, as envisaged in SDG 11, have to be in the core of the framework.
Despite these limitations, the new system of governance enhanced the resources
of several large cities as they could guarantee compliance with the reform measures.
Also, they have been able to obtain a larger share of not only the government but
also other domestic resources and international funds. The major concern in this
context is that the strategy of urban development got dictated by a few financial
institutions, international donors and credit-rating agencies. Privatisation, partner-
ship arrangement and resident groups (upper and middle class) led projects became
easier options as these put less pressure on municipal budget while those that were
not self-sustaining and not having cost recovery mechanism had low priority.
Empirical studies suggest that it is difficult to meet the stipulations of the new
system of governance for infrastructural projects in small and medium towns and in
slums and low-income areas. There would be lower possibility of even the public
sector projects being located there if these become increasingly dependent on
institutional borrowing and capital market. It would be important to examine if it
would be possible to launch projects for provision of health and basic amenities,
particularly covering slum dwellers and other vulnerable sections of population, as
envisaged under SDG 11. Bringing in the concerns for natural and cultural heritage,
minimising death, ailment and economic losses caused by disasters, etc., would be
impossible without having an ‘integrated and sustainable human settlement
114 A. Kundu
planning framework’. Similarly, planning for the core, periphery and hinterland in
an integrated manner would be a challenge if cost recovery and profitability become
the overriding concerns. The continuation of the new liberal perspective is likely to
accentuate intra regional disparity and the gaps between rich and poor localities
within cities.
Given these macro concerns, financial instruments, such as bonds, debentures,
etc., are now being designed that would provide small local bodies access to
institutional funds through mobilisation of resources at the state level. This requires
the local bodies to route their revenue earnings through an escrow account in a bank
whose conditionalities operationally would be less stringent. A new initiative has
been launched to set up a Pooled Finance Development Fund for credit enhance-
ment for smaller local bodies. Furthermore, financial institutions are being urged
and advised to ensure adequate social sector funding using criteria other than strict
market profitability so that access of the poor to basic amenities, transport and open
space can be enhanced. Under the mission ‘Housing for All’, significant interest
subvention has been envisaged for the poor. The mission guidelines must now
ensure that this subsidy goes to house construction by or for the poor and vulnerable
population, including the slum dwellers.
It is unfortunate that in situ slum redevelopment, the key vertical under the
Housing for All mission received the least attention in the first phase of the
implementation. Attempts are now being made to resolve the land title issue for the
slum dwellers so that rapid progress can be made in implementing this vertical.
Happily, beneficiary led housing has been the most successful vertical. Attempts are
being made to give a plot with land title to the poor and shelterless so that they can
be included in this vertical.
6 The UN Institutional Architecture for Achieving

the SDGs
The adoption of urban and human settlement linked Sustainable Development

Goals 11, postulating territorially balanced development, along with the New Urban
Agenda (NUA) and the Sendai Framework firmly places urbanisation at the fore-
front of international development policy. It has been argued that although SDG 11
is just one among the 17 SDGs, it impacts on the implementation of almost all
the SDGs, with focus on urban areas. Cities and towns provide the strings that
connect all the SDGs since more than half of them have an urban component.
The former are in the centre stage for meeting the targets and addressing many of
the persistent global challenges including pollution, climate change, resilience and
environmental degradation, road safety, etc. Besides, many countries consider the
New Urban Agenda (NUA) as a key driver and enabler for achieving several cities
and urban-related SDG targets. Importantly, NUA basically provides a vision and
perspective for urban development and does not have a framework for monitoring
the targets. It relies heavily on the monitoring systems for the SDG and the com-
prehensive City Prosperity Initiative (CPI) of UN-Habitat for implementation,
which increases institutional linkages and further enhances its impact. Similarly,
Sendai Framework overlaps and complements the SDG 11 in a significant manner.
In addition, the 2018 Kuala Lumpur Declaration on Cities 2030, adopted at the 9th
Session of the World Urban Forum (WUF), reaffirmed the power of cities in
achieving and contributing to the success of the Agenda 2030 and NUA targets.
Creative Cities Network, established by UNESCO currently has 180 cities across
72 countries. Several of their goals and targets integrate culture and creativity and
endorse the commitment to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, particularly
the SDG 11.
A major factor responsible for limited success in achieving the MDG goals was
the absence of a clear framework for implementation, based on transparent and
robust indicators and an effective institutional mechanism. To remedy this and for
the success of SDGs, an elaborate monitoring and evaluation system has been
designed. The ten targets to be achieved under SDG 11 by 2030 are listed in Table 4
below.
Inter-Agency Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) has the responsi-
bility to design a framework for implementation of the SDGs at global level. It
undertakes the task to develop and implement the global indicator framework which
was adopted in 2017. It has identified the indicators under each target based on an
understanding of the context of the goals and an overview of the data situation across
the countries. For this, the expertise from several UN organisations, having their
specialised domain, is available to the Agency. Importantly, UN-Habitat along with
UNISDR, UNESCO, WHO, UNODC, UNEP have assisted the member countries in
establishing systems for qualitative and quantitative data collection, including
developing guidelines for use of geospatial information technology, big data analytics
and community-based data at local, and national levels. UNESCO, for example,
organised two major expert meetings leading to the development of a complementary
framework for designing thematic indicators for culture under Goal 11.
In addition, the statistical organisations responsible for data generation and
compilation in different countries are members that assist in making a global level
assessment based on ground level situations. It recognises the need to re-define
certain concepts, propose new ones and evolve a methodology for their articulation
such as what constitutes a city, urban or peri-urban area, for building spatially
comparable indicators.
In building this framework, the Agency has been revisiting and revising the list
of indicators, innovating and modifying them in its regular meetings.
Understandably, while the list of indicators for MDGs was fixed, under SDG, this
has been evolving over time. Specification of some kind of standard criteria for
monitoring progress across countries, having widely different socio-economic
background, is a challenging task since the dictum in field level intervention is that
‘one size does not fit all’. And yet, the Agency has been able to propose a set of
indicators for the different goals and target, taking into consideration the data
availability, frequency and robustness in different countries.
116 A. Kundu
Three tiers of indicators have been identified under the SDG UN global
framework. Indicators that are conceptually clear and have internationally estab-
lished methodology and standard for their construction belong to tier-1 or tier-2.
The only difference between them is that the tier-1 indicators are produced regularly
by more than half of the countries in the world, which is not the case for those
categorised in tier-2. Indicators that currently have no such methodology, but are in
the process of being developed, belong to tier-3.
For follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda, United Nations High-level
Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) has been established, under
the auspices of the Economic and Social Council, as the global platform. It brings
all stakeholders—governments, local authorities, civil society, private sector, aca-
demia, the scientific and technological community, to one platform for sharing and
exchanging experiences, identifying gaps and proposing corrective actions.
Member States present their national reports on a specific goal, determined in
advance, to the HLPF, that are reviewed along with the reports and contributions
from other major stakeholders such as United Nations, Department of Economic
and Social Affairs, etc. HLPF reviews the efforts and programmes related to the
goal implemented at local, national and international levels, and provides key
recommendations on how to jointly address existing gaps, strengthen partnerships
and support resource mobilisation. A review of the Goal 11 was attempted by HLPF
in July 2018.5
The national governments have the primary responsibility to follow-up, review
and monitor the implementation of the Goals and targets, under Article 47 of the
2030 Agenda. They are expected to undertake inclusive reviews at regular intervals,
based on disaggregated data to measure progress at national and sub-national levels.
SDG targets are to be integrated with the social, economic and environmental
programmes of the Governments. This requires creating capacities, enabling
environment and institutional structure. Attempt was made to do this for a few
MDGs indicators, for example, for monitoring progress in housing sector.
However, for several urban-related indicators of SDG, new systems have to be
established, particularly those necessitating spatially disaggregated data. UN
regional commissions support the countries in preparing inputs to the HLPF.6 The
critical issue here is that the information generated must be internationally
comparable. Countries that are signatory to the 2030 Agenda for SDGs are com-
mitted to participate in the review process for achieving the goals at the HLPF.
A large number of countries have conducted their national reviews on voluntary
basis and reported progress in their Voluntary National Reports (VNR) at the 2018
HLPF, overviewing the functioning of their local governments, urban observatories,
other city agencies, NGOs, private sector, etc., using geospatial data for a sample of
5
The 2017 HLPF was held in July at the United Nations, New York, focusing on the theme:
‘Eradicating poverty and promoting prosperity in a changing world’ covering SDGs 1, 2, 3. 5, 9,
14 and 17.
6
Regional Commissions convene annually their Forums for Sustainable Development annually
that, too, serve as platforms for coordinated implementation of the 2030 Agenda.
cities. These serve as the basis for assessing the progress towards achievuing the
SDGs.
High-Level Political Forum 2018 acknowledges that the transformative forces of
urbanisation, unleased while meeting the SDG 11, would create cross-cutting
opportunities to achieve a number of other SDGs. It is, therefore, important to
identify the connections and complementarities among the SDGs—particularly
between the urban-related SDG targets with other SDG targets.
In assessing the progress towards SDG 11, HLPF has benefitted significantly
from Reports of several other UN agencies. The most important among these is the
Synthesis Report prepared under the leadership of UN-Habitat, in collaboration of a
large number of UN agencies with the objective of ‘(T)tracking the Progress
towards Safe, Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Human Settlements’, as the title
of the report suggests. It presents progress made in elaborating the targets, refining
the indicators, mapping the baseline status with the achievement across countries
and speculating on financing for scaling up the activities. The report complements
the 2018 Secretary-General’s Progress Report on SDGs and the 2018
Secretary-General’s first quadrennial report on progress made in the implementation
of the New Urban Agenda.
7 Assessing Progress Made Towards Meeting the SDG 11

in India
7.1 National Level Architecture for Designing the SDG

Framework and Its Implementation
The success in implementing the strategy to achieve the SDGs and its monitoring is
dependent on partnerships of the global UN agency with national government/
departments that have been given the task of designing the framework and that
which would review the progress. The latter is expected to undertake inclusive
reviews at regular intervals, based on disaggregated data, to measure progress at
national and sub-national levels. This requires generation of massive information at
city, town and settlement level in a formalised and coordinated manner.
In India, a High-Level Steering Committee (HLSC) has been established for this
purpose under the chairpersonship of the Chief Statistician of India who is the
Secretary to the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). Its
membership comprises secretaries of the Ministries that provide data sources and
officials of NITI Aayog. The Terms of Reference (TOR) of HLSC are to (a) review,
refine and add indicators, (b) approve the methodology for the new and modified
indicators, (c) constitute sector-specific sub-committees to examine addition or
deletion of indicators and (d) suggest and recommend new surveys for indicators
where data is not available.
118 A. Kundu
Under the direction of HLSC, MoSPI has designed the National Indicator
Framework comprising 306 indicators, based on multiple-round consultations with
Union Ministries/Departments and States/UTs. The indicators respond to national
priorities and are in line with the SDGs. These constitute the backbone for moni-
toring the SDGs at the national level. A special SDG Unit has been created in Social
Statistics Division (SSD) under the Central Statistics Office of MoSPI to act as a
Data Focal Point to coordinate data-related activities with various line Ministries/
Department and other data source agencies. The SSD also periodically brings out
Country Report, analysing the progress towards SDGs. Importantly, since MoSPI’s
Secretary is the chairperson of HLSC, the former often acts on behalf of the latter.
Understandably, she/he is in regular contact with the IAEG-SDGs and reports
country’s progress in various SDGs and receives direction and guidance from it.
NITI Aayog is responsible for assessing the progress towards the SDGs at
national level. It has the mandate to oversee the implementation of SDGs in the
country and ensure that the national strategy of development is aligned to the SDGs.
In the spirit of international cooperation, it led the process of VNR preparation and
submitted its first VNR for the year 2017 to HLPF. This was focused on the
progress made towards achieving Goals 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 14 and 17, as was agreed upon
for this year in the HLPF. It is important to note that for the MDGs, this reporting
responsibility was taken up by MoSPI. The Social Statistics Division of the
Ministry brought out the Millennium Development Goals—India Country Report
periodically, starting from the year 2005 and ending with the Report for 2015, the
terminal year for the MDGs. Within the United Nations Development Framework
of 2003, which had 18 targets and 53 indicators at the global level, India had
contextualised these to identify 12 targets and 35 indicators.
The nature of SDGs, however, is such that advancement of one goal through a
programme impacts on the progress in other goals. In view of this, it is the NITI
Aayog and not the MoSPI which did a comprehensive mapping of SDG targets with
schemes and programmes of the central government Ministries (NITI Aayog 2018a).
Table 1 presents the names of the centrally sponsored and central sector schemes/
programmes, along with those of their Ministries, against the 10 targets of SDG-11.
It is important to note that each target is determined by several schemes belonging to
different Ministries. Also, each scheme impacts upon a number of SDG targets,
revealing complementarities among them. It is, however, not easy to quantitatively
determine the impact of each scheme on an SDG or to assess how differently an SDG
is impacted upon by different schemes. Any status report articulating the perfor-
mance of the country towards achieving the SDGs, therefore, will have to be
restricted to the macro level and cannot be disaggregated by Ministries or schemes.
In 2018, the third year of the SDG era, NITI Aayog (2018b) has prepared SDG
India Index- Baseline Report, in collaboration with MoSPI, Global Green Growth
Institute and United Nations Office in India, providing a holistic view on the social,
economic and environmental status. The Index has been constructed covering 13
out of 17 SDGs (leaving out Goals 12, 13, 14 and 17) and tracks the progress on a
set of 62 National Indicators, measuring the outcomes of the programmes and
schemes of the Government of India having a bearing on the SDGs. It has placed
the states into 4 categories, achiever, front runner, performer and aspirant,
according to their score in the descending order of their performance, in respect of
individual SDGs as also at the aggregative level, as discussed below in this section.
7.2 Interdependencies Between SDG 11 and Other Goals

Identified by NITI Aayog
For a holistic understanding of the implications of SDG 11, it must be analysed in

relation to several other Goals. NITI Aayog has stipulated that SDG 11 impacts on
the following goals directly since it
(a) builds resilience of the poor and reduces their exposure and vulnerability to
extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and thus
helps in poverty alleviation (Goal 1)
(b) improves living environment, reduces number of accidents, improves air and
water quality etc., thereby promoting good health and well-being (Goal 3)
(c) increases women’s participation in political, economic and public life, pro-
moting gender equality (Goal 5)
(d) provides access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene, thereby
reducing pollution through proper recycling and waste management (Goal 6)
(e) develops reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure helping industry,
innovation and infrastructure (Goal 9)
(f) facilitates orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration of people thereby
reducing spatial inequalities (Goal 10)
(g) ensures environmentally sound management of wastes, minimising their
adverse impact, thereby supporting sustainable consumption and production
(Goal 12), and
(h) helps building responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative institu-
tions, promoting peace and justice (Goal 16)
Given such interdependencies across the SDG goals, NITI Aayog has the
challenging responsibility of coordinating across central ministries, States/Union
Territories, civil society organisations, academia and business sector. It has
designed structural links and collaborative mechanisms between national and state
government for effective monitoring and reporting.
7.3 Constructing SDG-11 Index at State and UT Level:

Selection of Indicators
The SDG India Index, prepared by NITI Aayog, can become a tool for focused
policy dialogue as it provides a macro-level assessment of the performance of all
120 A. Kundu
Indian States and UTs, as mentioned above. It helps in highlighting crucial gaps
related to tracking SDGs and identifying the areas, where improvement in the
statistical systems is urgently required. The Aayog proposes to further refine and
bring in additional indicators as also recommend improvements in the methodology
of data collection, reporting and analysis. It would also explore the possibility of
generating disaggregated data and developing capacity for real-time monitoring and
measuring of incremental progress. Envisioning the Way Forward, the Report notes
‘NITI Aayog will endeavor to ensure that the SDG India Index indicators are
further refined, data collection and reporting processes are improved and the
potential for disaggregating data and methodological improvements are explored’.
It may, thus, be seen that the Aayog is willing to undertake multiple tasks including
that of both designing the implementing the framework as also measuring and
monitoring the progress.
At the global level, IAEG-SDGs has proposed 15 indicators for assessing pro-
gress in relation to 10 targets and 10 goals under SDG-11. Of these 15 indicators, 4
are in tier 1, 5 in tier 2 and the rest in tier 3 (Table 4). National Indicator Framework
(NFI), proposed by MoSPI, lists the indicators that are expected to constitute a basis
for evaluation of progress towards achieving SDGs. Importantly, the framework not
merely gives the set of indicators but also gives the data sources and their peri-
odicity. The number of indicators exceeds that at the global level by one, since 3
indicators have been proposed against one at the global level, for target 11.1 and no
indicator could be proposed for the target 11.c, due to data constraints and lack of
clarity with regard to scope and coverage. It is, however, surprising that NITI
Aayog has restricted its performance assessment to only 4 indicators under two
targets, with the exclusion of several important dimensions or areas of concern
(Table 5). It has been noted above that as many as nine among the 15 indicators,
proposed by IAEG-SDG, belong to tier-1 and tier-2 and hence are expected to have
well-defined methodology and data sources and more than half of the countries at
global level are reporting them on a regular basis. Furthermore, MoSPI has iden-
tified and certified 16 indicators under NIF, confirming availability and reliability of
the data required for these. In this background, it is difficult to justify the conser-
vatism of NITI Aayog in restricting the scope of performance analysis to four
indicators only.
It would, however, be erroneous to believe that information on these 15 indi-
cators are being compiled in the specific format mentioned in Table 1, in a routine
manner. In fact, these need to be constructed from the raw data, available in
different divisions and organisations in the Ministries, after finalising and specifying
the methodology. Given the absence of data collection and tabulation in a
well-defined framework within the present system, assessing the performance using
a larger set of indicators to aticulate all the dimensions of SDG 11 would indeed
require considerable effort. Nonetheless, there is no reason why this cannot be
achieved within a time frame of six months or a year.
Table 4 Global and National Level Indicators for SDG 11
Target Global indicators with tiers National indicators Periodicity Data source
(as in
Table 1)
11.1 11.1.1 Proportion of urban population living in 11.1.1: Percentage of Slums/Economically Weaker Sections Annual MHUPA
slums, informal settlements or inadequate housing (EWS) households covered through formal/affordable
(tier-1) housing.
11.1.2: Percentage of Slum Area Covered with basic Annual MHUA
Services
11.1.3: Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums, Annual MHUA
informal Settlements or Inadequate Housing
11.2 11.2.1 Proportion of population that has convenient 11.2.1: Proportion of cities with efficient urban mobility and Annual MoEFandCC
access to public transport, by sex, age and persons public transport
with disabilities (tier-2)
11.3 11.3.1 Ratio of land consumption rate to population 11.3.1: Proportion of cities with integrated development Annual MHUA
growth rate (tier-2) plans.
11.3.2 Proportion of cities with a direct participation 11.3.2: Share of Mixed Land-Use Area in overall city Annual MHUA
of civil society in urban planning and management land-use
(tier-2) 11.3.3: Net Density Annual MHUA
5 Integrated Development and Sustainable Cities: Need for …
11.4 11.4.1 Per capita expenditure on preservation, 11.4.1: Restoration and Reuse of Historic Buildings Annual MHUA
protection and conservation of all cultural and
natural heritage (tier-3)
11.5 11.5.1 Deaths, and directly affected persons due to 11.5.1: Number of deaths, missing persons and directly Annual Home
disasters per 100,000 population (tier-2) affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 Affairs
11.5.2 Economic loss in GDP attributed to disasters population
(tier-2)
(continued)
121
Table 4 (continued)
122
Target Global indicators with tiers National indicators Periodicity Data source
(as in
Table 1)
11.6 11.6.1 Proportion of urban solid waste regularly 11.6.1: Proportion of urban solid waste regularly collected Annual MHUA
collected (tier-2) and with adequate final discharge out of total urban solid
waste generated, by cities
11.6.2 Mean levels of fine particulate matter in cities 11.6.2: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. Annual MoEFandCC
(population weighted) (tier-1) PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)
11.6.3: Number of days the levels of fine particulate matter Annual MoEFandCC
(PM 2.5 and PM 10) above mean level
11.7 11.7.1 Share of open space for public use for all, by 11.7.1: Per Capita Availability of Green Spaces Annual MHUA
sex, age and persons with disabilities (tier-3)
11.7.2 Proportion of persons suffering physical or
sexual harassment in the previous 12 months (tier-
3)
11.a 11.a.1 Proportion of population living in cities that 11.a.1: Proportion of population living in cities that Annual MHUA
implement urban and regional level. plans (tier-3) implement urban and regional development plans
integrating population projections and resource needs, by
size of city
11.b 11.b.1 Countries adopting national disaster risk 11.b.1: Whether the country has adopted and implemented Annual Home
reduction strategies in line with the Sendai national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Affairs
Framework (tier-1) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2031
11.b.2 Local governments (%) implementing local 11.b.2: Proportion of State and local governments that Annual Home
disaster risk reduction strategies (tier-2) adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies Affairs
in line with national disaster risk reduction strategies
11.c 11.c.1 Financial support (%) to the least developed National Indicator not yet evolved
countries for construction and retrofitting of
sustainable, resilient buildings (tier-3)
A. Kundu
Table 5 Indicators used in SDG India Index- Baseline report

SDG global targets Indicators selected for SDG India National
Index Target
value for
2030
11.1 By 2030, ensure access for all to 1. Houses completed under Pradhan 100
adequate, safe and affordable housing Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY) as a
and basic services and upgrade slums. percentage of net demand
assessment for houses
2. Percentage of urban households 0
living in slums
11.6 By 2030, reduce the adverse per 3. Percentage of wards 100% door to 100
capita environmental impact of cities, door waste collection
including by paying special attention 4. Percentage of waste processed 100
to air quality and municipal and other
waste management.
7.4 An Assessment of the Performance in SDG 11

at Sub-National Level: Database, Methodology
and Pattern
Indian states and UTs perform very poorly in terms of SDG 11. Their scores range
between 23 and 71 which is worse than the Composite SDG Index, ranging
between 42 and 69. Similarly, SDG 11 scores for the UTs vary between 6 and 64
against the composite scores of 57 and 68 respectively. Furthermore, while no state
has been identified as achiever and only one and 3 are placed in front runners and
performers category respectively, all the others belong to the bottom category of
aspirants in terms of SDG 11 in the total of 29 states. This is much worse than the
pattern on aggregative SDGs, wherein as many as 3 are front runners and 23 are
performers while only 3 belong to the bottom category. Similarly, among the 7
UTs, only one is identified as performer while 5 are aspirants, as per SDG 11 while
at the aggregative level, 2 are front runners and as many as 5 are performers. The
patterns for all other SDGs are better than that of SDG 11.
It is indeed true that the performance towards an SDG depends on the indicators
that have been selected for the assessment. India’s performance would have been
much better in SDG 11, if instead of percentage of houses constructed under
PMAY, a mission which was launched in 2014, the indictor selected was the
percentage of houses whose construction has been sanctioned or those whose 80 per
cent construction is complete. It is well known that PMAY was slow to start and
release of funds in initial years was low. The momentum has picked up during only
the last two years. Considering the indicator like percentage of houses constructed
under PMAY, at the same level as that of wards with 100% door to door waste
collection is like putting apples and oranges in the same basket. It is alright to set
the target for waste collection across wards as 100% as the local bodies have been
124 A. Kundu
increasing the coverage over decades. It would nonetheless be inappropriate to take

the same target for the percentage of constructed houses under PMAY in 2017-18
since the mission started only in 2014. Understandably, the values in the housing
indicator are low while those for waste collection are large. Furthermore, selecting
the share of slum dwellers in urban population as a negative reflection on perfor-
mance would be erroneous since incidence of slums vary across the states widely
due to historical reasons and state policies cannot be held responsible for high
values. Also, this would give an adverse policy signal to concerned authorities
prompting them to lunch slum clearance measures. Coverage of the poor and slum
households with housing and basic services, during a specific period, would pos-
sibly capture the performance of the states/UTs in a more appropriate manner.
Clearly, the present SDG 11 index misses out on several important dimensions
and is a poor reflection of the ground level initiatives. Irrespective of the impact of
including additional indicators, as proposed in the global list or in NFI, there is no
way that the limited coverage of the present index can be defended. This is espe-
cially because the country is globally acclaimed as having a robust statistical system
and has been a pioneer in developing methodology for operationalising concepts,
which is often accepted by global institutions. Exclusion of environmental
parameters, water and air pollution, sustainability, heritage, disaster proneness, etc.
and more importantly not having a framework for integrated and inclusive settle-
ment planning are glaring inadequacies that need to be remedied in the next
assessment report and this must be brought out urgently.
One final point is about the methodology of making the indicators scale free
(NITI report calls it normalising or rescaling) and their composition for obtaining
the SDG 11 Index score and the Composite SDG score. It is reported that ‘equal
weightages were assigned to each indicator and the arithmetic mean’ was taken as
the Index value. Interestingly, the method of scaling makes a significant departure
from the UNDP’s ‘range equalisation method’, applied in constructing Human
Development Indices in the initial years wherein each rescaled indicator has a range
from zero to hundred. As a result, the range has not been rendered equal through
scale transformation across the indicators and the average values are widely dif-
ferent, as per the NITI methodology. One would note that the average of the
rescaled housing index is only 3 and that of waste collection is 74 while the targets
for both are 100. This in a way implies that waste collection gets 25 times weight
compared to the index of completed housing. In other words, even if a state A has
performed 4 times better than state B in housing, it would not be able to make up
for mere 10% deficit in waste collection, as a result of the methodology adopted.
Undoubtedly, the SDG 11 score would improve considerably if the UNDP method
of scale transformation is adopted across the selected indicators.
8 A Summary of Conclusions and Their Development

Implications
The growth in urban population in India during the past seven decades since
Independence has, at best, been modest and fluctuating. The process has been
oriented towards large cities because of their higher demographic growth, attribu-
table to both natural increase as well as in-migration. This process has been sup-
ported and even encouraged by the state with the understanding that these cities are
more efficient and can attract investments from within and outside the country. This
perspective of urban industrial development, associated with neo-liberal philoso-
phy, has been responsible for the small and medium-sized towns, located away
from the emerging global and national centres, particularly those in backward
regions, not attracting much population and investment, resulting in their stagna-
tion. Many of these towns got declassified due to loss of non-agricultural
employment and population.
All these cast serious doubts on the assumption that India will record accelerated
urban growth in coming decades and that it will be an epicentre of global urban-
isation. The high-growth perspectives on urbanisation, as put forward by interna-
tional and national organisations, have turned out to be erroneous. The strategy of
promoting large city-based urban industrial development seems to have come to a
critical juncture and there are apprehensions of premature deindustrialisation, evi-
dence of exclusionary urbanisation and shrinkage of cities.
Slowing down of economic and demographic growth in urban areas could be
attributed, at least partly, to the measures of reform in the programmes and insti-
tutions and the neo-liberal policies, whereby the responsibility for management of
civic amenities and investment in infrastructural projects has shifted from the
central and state government agencies, partly to local bodies, but largely to financial
intermediaries and the capital market. Urban growth has been concentrated in a few
large cities in developed regions that could attract national as well as global
investment. The cities that were in a stronger position to take up public works and
infrastructure development projects on their own, are benefiting from this per-
spective. By contrast, smaller towns are stagnating due to their inability to attract
investments in a globally competitive environment. This, coupled with a decline in
central or state assistance, has made it extremely difficult for these towns, partic-
ularly those in less-developed states, to invest in improving infrastructure and basic
services. All this has led to exacerbation of inequity in the provision of basic
services across states and size categories of urban centres.
Given the resource constraints with government agencies, financial institutions,
international donors and credit-rating agencies have come up with innovative
arrangements for resource mobilisation, making significant impact on the processes
of urban development. The system of allowing extra Floor Space Index, to be
traded in the land market, has been a convenient method of resource mobilisation,
enabling public agencies, starved of funds, to participate in Public–Private
Partnership projects. Although the basic idea behind these arrangements was to
126 A. Kundu
promote greater land-use efficiency, they have led to spatial reorganisation of urban
population, leading to further segregation of rich and poor.
A large number of Urban Local Bodies have adopted policies of privatisation,
partnership arrangements and promotion of community-based projects to lessen the
pressure on their budgetary resources. Projects, sub-contracted to private agencies
or launched within a PPP framework, mostly have stipulations of cost recovery,
aimed at making them financially self-sustaining. Understandably, low-income
neighbourhoods find it difficult to meet these stipulations. The same is true in public
sector projects making them increasingly dependent on institutional borrowing and
capital markets. These accentuate gaps between rich and poor localities within the
cities, particularly with regard to water and sanitation facilities, resulting in serious
problems of health and hygiene for the entire city, coming in direct conflict with the
target of inclusivity in SDG 11.
Several metropolitan cities have chosen to prepare vision documents in place of
Master Plans. The responsibility of detailing schemes and modalities for their
implementation are left to the stakeholders, including private builders and financial
intermediaries. Even the task of preparing the vision document has sometimes been
sub-contracted to national or global research cum consultancy agencies that bring in
the perspective from other countries and global cities. It is stipulated that projects
should be prepared and implemented through community participation but unfor-
tunately, the latter has mostly been used as window dressing.
High urban growth, as projected by Asian Development Bank in its vision
documents Asia 2030, as also stipulated by expert committees of the Government
and statistical divisions of international agencies, can indeed occur while, at the
same time, creating sustainable cities, integrated with the regional economy that
cater to the basic needs of all sections of population. This, however, calls for a
change in the strategy of urban and regional development that encourages the
emergence and growth of small urban centres, integrated with the regional econ-
omy, and addresses socio-economic and infrastructural deficiencies in the region as
a whole, as envisaged under SDG 11. Given the demographic pressure on the
agrarian system, this shift in policy is imminent. There has to be a massive transfer
of people from primary to secondary and tertiary activities. This does not neces-
sarily imply a massive geographical shift of population over long distances, if
human settlement planning is attempted, ensuring continuity between urban and
suburban with their rural periphery, as stipulated under SDG 11.
It is possible to envisage certain level of migration and transfer of labour, surplus
in agriculture, to large and medium cities, by requiring the later to have inclusive
policies and provisions. Given the political economy in the country and strong
emerging lobby of urban upper and middle class, there will be political resistance to
this. It would, therefore, be desirable to provide support to potentially successful
small and medium-sized urban settlements, so that they can provide employment at
a decent level of productivity and earnings for the growing labour force. These
towns would maintain strong linkages with their surrounding rural areas.
Furthermore, the level of infrastructure and public amenities can be strengthened in
new towns that have emerged on the urban scene, without being linked to global or
national capital market and despite having no state support. An urban development
strategy, combining these approaches is likely to respond to sustainability and
inclusivity requirements of SDG 11, while addressing the socio-economic depri-
vations of marginalised and vulnerable population.
Recognising the fact that the absence of a clear framework for implementation
has been responsible for the limited success in achieving the MDGs, an elaborate
monitoring and evaluation system has been designed for the SDGs. IAEG-SDGs
has the responsibility to design a framework for implementation of the SDGs at
global level while HLFC is the key organisation responsible for performance
assessment and monitoring. The success in achieving the SDGs and its monitoring
is dependent on partnerships of the global UN agency with national government/
departments. As a signatory to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
India is expected to incorporate the SDGs into its development programmes. In
compliance, a High-Level Steering Committee (HLSC) has been established to
refine and add indicators and propose the methodology for assessing achievements
at national and sub-state level. Under its guidance, MoSPI has prepared National
Indicator Framework (NIF) for this purpose.
NITI Aayog has assessed the performance of the country together with that of
the states and union territories in 2018. Unfortunately, it has used limited number of
indicators, disregarding the list prepared by IAEG-SDG or the MoSPI. Nine among
the 15 indicators for SDG 11, proposed by IAEG-SDG, belong to tier-1 and tier-2
and hence are expected to have well-defined methodology. Furthermore, MoSPI in
India has identified and certified 16 indicators under NIF, confirming their avail-
ability and reliability. It is, therefore, difficult to justify the conservatism of NITI
Aayog in restricting the scope of performance analysis to four indicators only.
Finally, the methodology for normalising or rescaling the indictors makes a
departure from the UNDP’s range equalisation method. Undoubtedly, the SDG 11
score for India, states and UTs would improve considerably if the UNDP method of
scale transformation is adopted, across the indicators. That would be a more real-
istic articulation of the ground situation.
References
Dubey, A., Gangopadhyay, S., & Wadhwa, W. (2001). Occupational structure and incidence of
poverty in Indian towns of different sizes. Review of Development Economics, 5(1), 49–59.
Kundu, A. (2019). Trends in mobility in India: Issues of labour market integration and exclusion of
vulnerable population. Area Development and Policy.
Kundu, A. (2011). Trends and processes of urbanisation in India. Urbanisation and Emerging
Population Issues 6, International Institute for Urbanisation and Development, London
Kundu, A. (2001). Urban development, infrastructure financing and emerging system of
governance in India: a perspective. Discussion Paper No. 48, Management of Social
Transformations, Vol. 4(15). UNESCO, Paris.
Mohan, R., & Dasgupta, S. (2005). The 21st century: Asia becomes urban. Economic and Political
Weekly, 40(3), 213–223.
128 A. Kundu
NITI Aayog. (2018a). Sustainable Development Goals India: Mapping of Central Sector Schemes
and Ministries of Government of India, Government of India, New Delhi.
NITI Aayog. (2018b). SDG India index: Baseline report. New Delhi: Government of India
Planning Commission. (2013). Twelfth five year plan (2012–17): Faster, sustainable and more
inclusive growth. New Delhi: Planning Commission, Government of India.
Planning Commission. (2011). Faster, sustainable and more inclusive growth: An approach to the
twelfth five year plan (2012–17). New Delhi: Planning Commission, Government of India.
Planning Commission. (2008). Eleventh five year plan 2007–12, Volume III. New Delhi: Planning
Commission, Government of India.
Planning Commission. (2003). Draft Tenth five year plan 2002-07. New Delhi: Planning
Commission, Government of India.
Planning Commission. (1998). Ninth Five Year Plan. New Delhi: Planning Commission,
Government of India.
Rao, P. S. N. (1999). Financing urban infrastructure: The emerging trends. Monograph presented
at the International Seminar on Financing and Pricing of Urban Infrastructure. New Delhi:
Human Settlement Management Institute.
World Bank. (2016). Remarks by World Bank Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer Sri
MulyaniIndrawati at the Bretton Woods Committee. Speeches and Transparencies, World
Bank. June 23.
World Bank. (2015a). South Asia not taking full economic advantage of urbanization, Press
Release, Sept 24.
World Bank. (2015b). Leveraging urbanization in South Asia: managing spatial transformation for
prosperity and livability, Peter Ellis and Mark Roberts.
Chapter 6
Family Planning—A Smart Investment
for India to Achieve the Sustainable
Development Goals
Poonam Muttreja
Abstract India has seen significant progress on account of various health and
economic indicators since the inception of its family planning programme. And
while there is a lot to be proud of, we still have miles to go to ensure health and
equity among all our people. Family Planning is gaining increasing recognition as a
critical tool to enable any nation to meet its development goals, with its proven
impact on all seventeen of the Sustainable Development Goals. As a signatory of
the Sustainable Development Goals, India has both a responsibility as well as an
opportunity at hand. India needs to harness its demographic dividend by recog-
nizing and investing in the needs of its youth and adolescents, including their sexual
and reproductive needs. It is time to work even harder to uproot the deeply
entrenched regressive social norms that are impeding the progress of our nation by
investing in well thought out and executed social and behaviour change commu-
nication strategies. And finally, Agenda 2030 should not be limited to being only
the end goal; it should influence and inspire the journey of any nation, as it walks
the path of sustainable development.
Keywords Family planning Gender equality Demographic dividend
1 Family Planning and Sustainable Development

Goals—Linkages and Convergence
With a 17.7% share in the global population (United Nations, Department of

Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division 2017), the success of global
commitments like the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is hugely shouldered
by India. The 17 SDGs and 169 targets of ‘Transforming the World: the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development’, which have been adopted by 193 member
nations are ambitious and universal and have integrated the world to take concrete
P. Muttreja (&)
Population Foundation of India, New Delhi, India
e-mail: pmuttreja@populationfoundation.in

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_6
130 P. Muttreja
measures for global development and prosperity. At the heart of the SDGs are the
five Ps: people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnership, which have brought
together global initiatives and united the world in its fight against poverty, to protect
the planet and to ensure prosperity. The SDGs are increasingly becoming one of our
touchstones, guiding the global development agenda. Closer home, the SDGs are
embedded in India’s existing policies and programmes and complement our
national goals making it imperative for national programmes, at all scales and
magnitudes to resonate the ‘SDG vision’. In an increasingly connected,
multi-stakeholder era, these 17 goals, if met, have the potential to metamorphose
the world. These seemingly diverse goals aren’t mutually exclusive and realizing
these goals will not be possible unless every stakeholder, be it the government, the
private sector, the civil society or the citizen, share its great vision and work
towards achieving it.
‘Universal access to contraception’ is amongst the 19 priority targets of the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that, as per the Post-2015 Consensus
represent the best value for money, translating to $120 social, economic and
environmental benefit for every $1 spent (Post 2015). Family planning investments
have demonstrated monetary savings in several development areas, which include
immunization, education, water and sanitation and maternal health, among several
others. Data from seven countries across three continents shows that investments of
every dollar in family planning/reproductive health result in substantial savings
across sectors. For instance, every dollar invested in family planning has resulted in
savings in other development areas ranging from $2 in Ethiopia to over $6 in
Guatemala and Bangladesh, and about $9 in Bolivia (Family Planning Saves Lives
2009). A 2014 economic study also demonstrated that ensuring universal access to
sexual and reproductive health would result in returns worth $150 dollars for every
dollar invested (Copenhagen Consensus 2014). Every 1% reduction in fertility
would potentially increase GDP by 0.25% (Cleland et al. 2012). Guttmacher
Institute’s report titled ‘Adding It Up’ released in 2009 showed that an increase in
global investments in family planning from $3 to $6.7 billion, would result in
decrease in unwanted pregnancies, which in turn would reduce the cost of providing
the recommended maternal and new born care package by $5.1 billion—from $23.0
to $17.9 billion (Singh et al. 2009).
The link between the SDG goals and family planning may seem disparate at first,
but a narrative can be traced upon analyzing the bigger picture. Family Planning
directly or indirectly impacts all the 17 SDG goals and the sexual and reproductive
health and rights agenda (Starbird et al. 2016) has direct implications on two of the
17 goals—health (Goal 3) and gender equality (Goal 5) (Knowledge for Health
2016). The SDGs being interdependent in nature would need direct and indirect
actions in every aspect to realize the foreseen development outcomes. There is
consensus that expanding access to and improving the quality of family planning
programs is key to ensuring a healthy population, enabling them to reach their full
potential. Access to quality family planning services has a direct impact on birth
spacing, limiting and delaying pregnancies, eventually leading to good health and
well being (Goal 3). Delaying childbirth and limiting the number children
6 Family Planning—A Smart Investment for India to Achieve … 131
holistically impacts the quality of lives of both the mother and the child- for one, it
allows the women enough time to complete their education (Goal 4) and also
facilitates the entry of more women into the workforce, giving them financial
autonomy while simultaneously boosting the economy, making it an effective way
to achieve gender equality and equity (Goal 5) (Knowledge for Health 2016).
With the right investments in information and services, we can build an informed
and educated population leading to the economic growth (Goal 8) of the nation. All
these outcomes will culminate into the reduction in poverty (Goal 1) and
inequalities (Goal 10). Poverty goes beyond inadequate income or resources and is
perpetrated by societal discrimination, lack of fundamental needs of the people such
as education, health and the unequal status of women in society. The lack of access
to health services and proper nutrition, especially for women and girls, percolates to
the rest of the community and sets off a domino effect of adversities.
The SDGs are of tremendous significance in the Indian context-given that we are
a young nation today with majority of our population in the reproductive age group
of 15–49 years. To be more specific, India has an adolescent population of 21% and
youth population of 34.8% giving us a rare demographic advantage (Census 2011;
Youth in India 2017). And while we often hear talks of this demographic advantage
the youth force poses for the country, there are simultaneous counter-arguments
questioning whether we are really investing enough in our youth and adolescents to
ensure favourable outcomes in the future. Along with creating jobs, it is important
to promote access to family planning and contraceptive services is of particular
significance in a nation like India, which is trying to capitalize on its demographic
dividend, that is, more working-age people supporting fewer dependents.
In the years leading up to the adoption and widespread recognition of the SDGs,
India, among several other countries, has demonstrated its commitment towards
family planning at the 2012 London Summit on Family Planning by committing to
invest $2 billion to meet the family planning needs of existing users as well as
adding 48 million new users to the current pool by 2020. This pledge was recently
renewed with an increased investment amounting to $3 billion by 2020 (Family
Planning 2020). In addition, as a signatory to the SDGs, India has also committed to
providing universal access to family planning services by 2030 (Family Planning
2020). Yet, India stands at 143 in a list of 188 nations in the SDG index developed
to show achievement on health indicators (GBD 2015). For India to meet the SDGs
and the nation’s family planning goals, it is important that it prioritizes its invest-
ment on women’s health and family planning.
132 P. Muttreja
2 India’s Successes—Improved Health Indicators,

but Need to Reach to Last Mile
India was one of the first countries in the developing world to have a family
planning programme in 1952 with the ultimate goal of lowering fertility and
slowing the population growth rate. Over the decades, there has been a transfor-
mation in family planning policies and programmatic implementation. They are
currently being repositioned to not only achieve population stabilization, but also
reduce mortality and morbidity and ensure quality reproductive health services. The
outcome of these efforts is reflected in the progress made on several health indi-
cators such as infant and maternal mortality rates as well as life expectancy at birth.
In a bid to cater to the changing priorities of the people, The Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare, Government of India, in recent years, has made sustained efforts to
reach the last mile through initiatives such as Mission Parivar Vikas to focus
attention on high fertility districts, introducing three new contraceptives in the
public health system and the introduction of the logistics management information
system to streamline the distribution of contraceptives in accordance with the
demand.
The shift in thinking in India’s policies, approaches and strategies has been
shaped by the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD)
held in Cairo in 1994 (International Conference on Population and Development
1994). The ICPD emphasized on the role of women’s empowerment in influencing
reproductive behaviour and impacting fertility. India was a signatory to ICPD,
which viewed population issues holistically from the lens of sustainable develop-
ment, reproductive health and reproductive rights. India formulated and launched its
National Population Policy (NPP) in 2000 (National Population Policy 2000) which
took its basic philosophy from the ICPD-Programme of Action (International
Conference on Population and Development 1994) and focused on improving the
quality of life of the people as the means to achieve population stabilization. The
National Population Policy of 2000 envisioned a comprehensive approach to
population stabilisation, far from a target-driven, control centric approach to reduce
the total fertility rate (TFR) (National Population Policy 2000). The policy called
for addressing the social determinants of health, promoting women’s empowerment
and education, adopting a target-free approach, encouraging community partici-
pation and ensuring convergence of service delivery at the community level. Social
factors such as age at marriage, age at first pregnancy and education of girls for
maternal and infant wellbeing find a prominent place in the policy along with
promoting access to a basket of contraceptive choices. However, despite policies in
place, more work needs to be done towards addressing the unmet need for family
planning.
India’s commitments to improve access to family planning services and reduce
the unmet need for contraception made at the London Summit on Family Planning
in 2012 brought family planning back to the center stage of development (Family
Planning 2020). Furthermore, the reproductive, maternal, new born, child, and
adolescent health (RMNCH+A) strategy adopted by the Government of India

addresses reproductive rights and integrates the current family planning services
with maternal, child and adolescent health (Government of India. Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare 2013). Building on the gains of the National Health
Mission, the Government of India launched the RMNCH+A Strategy in 2013. The
strategy adopts a comprehensive approach to address inequitable distribution of
healthcare services, especially for the vulnerable population. It also emphasizes on
the need to reinforce efforts in poor-performing districts in the country, already
identified as high focus districts. The strategy rests on the continuum of care
concept and holistically encompasses reproductive, maternal, new born, child, and
adolescent health interventions under a broad umbrella, thus focusing on a lifecycle
approach. In order to track performance, it introduces initiatives such as score cards
to track performance, national Iron+Initiative to address the issue of anaemia across
all age groups and the comprehensive screening and early interventions for birth
defects, diseases and deficiencies among adolescents and children.
The country’s sustained efforts over the years have yielded positive results in
improving the health and demographic indicators. There has been a dramatic
slowing down in India’s population growth rates. An analysis of the Indian Census
data on population confirms a declining trend in its growth rate over the decades.
The decadal growth rate during 2001–2011 was recorded at 17.7% (Census 2011)
as against 21.5% over the period 1991–2001 (Census 2001). According to the
National Family Health Survey (NFHS), India’s total fertility rate (TFR-total
number of children born or likely to be born to a woman in her lifetime), has fallen
from 3.4 (National Family Health Survey-1 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 1992) to
2.2 (National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2015)– very
close to the replacement rate of 2.1, which translates to two children per couple. In
fact, TFR has reached replacement levels of 2.1 in 24 Indian states. India’s urban
TFR at 1.8 is less than the replacement level, and close to the European average of
1.6. There has also been significant progress regarding critical indicators impacting
sexual and reproductive health—child survival, age at marriage, literacy and edu-
cation, women’s agency and empowerment, maternity and delivery care, and
awareness of contraceptive methods. In 2005–06, for instance, nearly half (47%) of
the girls were reportedly married below the legal age of 18 years (National Family
Health Survey-3 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2005). By 2015–16, this proportion
had fallen to 27%. The maternal mortality deaths have been nearly halved from 254
per 100,000 live births in 2005–06 to 130 in 2015–2016 (National Family Health
Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2015; National Family Health Survey-3
India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2005). The Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) has declined
from 68 per 1000 live births in 2000 to 34 in 2016 (National Family Health
Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2015; National Family Health Survey-3
India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2005). The indicators are a reflection of the success
of the State’s efforts in promoting women’s health through initiatives such as the
National Health Mission (National Health Mission) and, in particular, the Janani
Suraksha Yojana that has encouraged women to give births in institutions under the
care of trained medical practitioners.
134 P. Muttreja
Although these are reasons to celebrate, greater efforts are needed for sustained
progress to ensure women are empowered further and can exercise choices and
freedom, especially in matters relating to their own reproductive health and rights.
Recent evidence from the NFHS 4 (2015–16) reveals a large (13%) unmet need for
family planning in India, translating to 30 million currently married women
(National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2015; National
Family Health Survey-3 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2005). These numbers are
reflective of the fact that the majority of Indian women do not have enough say or
control over their fertility decisions. There is tremendous pressure to get married
early and give birth to children-preferably sons—as soon as possible. For young
women, this can curtail their prospects for education, training and employment.
Many women do not want to become pregnant but, for many reasons, are unable to
use appropriate methods of contraception. Wide disparities and inequities in
women’s access to reproductive healthcare continue to persist. During the period
between 2005–06 and 2015–16, the use of any modern method of family planning
declined marginally for India as a whole and in 17 of the 28 states.
Access to health services still depends upon where one lives, how educated or
rich one is, and the community one belongs to. Access to family planning is
extremely limited for women who are the poorest and most vulnerable and those
who belong to socially disadvantaged communities. As per NFHS-4, contraceptive
use is the lowest, at 45%, among women from the scheduled tribes (ST) followed
by other backward classes (OBC) at 47% and those from the scheduled caste
(SC) at 49% (National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS
2015). The lack of agency and autonomy among women with regard to
decision-making on contraceptive use has translated into a gap between the wanted
or desired fertility rate (number of children a woman desires to have) of 1.8 as
opposed to the actual TFR of 2.2 (National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet.
Mumbai IIPS 2015).
The rise in abortion is another cause for worry as this could be attributed to an
increase in unplanned pregnancies. According to a 2015 Guttmacher study, an
average of 15.6 million abortions takes place in India every year (Singh et al. 2018).
Out of this number, only 5% of abortions take place in public health facilities,
which are the key source of healthcare for poor and rural women. If we look at
successful family planning programmes across the world, countries that have
out-performed India on several demographic and health indicators have focused on
increased investment in family planning, female education and employment
opportunities. We should note that access to family planning services is likely to
have an economic impact for families that extends beyond the reductions in fertility
and improvements in health to many other aspects of their lives.
3 Gender Equality in India- Meeting SDG 5 and Its

Targets
Having the freedom to plan one’s family is a matter of women’s rights and gender
justice—of treating women equally and with dignity. Ensuring universal access to
sexual and reproductive health and rights in accordance with the ICPD programme
of action is one of the targets of SDG 5.
It is unfortunate to note that a large burden of family planning still falls on
women, not on men. Between 2005–06 and 2015–16, there has been only a mar-
ginal decline in the use of female sterilization—down from 77 to 75%, among those
currently women (15–49 years) who are using modern contraceptives (National
Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet 2015; National Family Health Survey-3
India Factsheet 2005). The high use of female sterilisation is evidence of patriarchal
domination and reflective of the fact that the burden of family planning continues to
rest on women’s shoulders. In fact, female sterilization is the highest among women
from SCs at 39% followed by the OBCs at 37% and STs at 37%. The proportion of
men who use condoms is shockingly low—less than 6% in 2015–16. Again,
regrettably, male sterilization fell further from 1% in 2005–06 to 0.3% in 2015–16.
While, the reduction in the share of female sterilisation, however, small, is wel-
come, the drop in male sterilization is a matter of concern.
The discourse on the engagement of men as partners in accessing family plan-
ning and health services needs to go beyond contraceptive use. Systematic and
sustained engagement of men in health and family planning, not just as the clients
but as responsible partners to women, has the potential to improve access and use of
family planning services and bridge the gap of unmet need of contraception. Male
participation should not mean that women’s decision-making powers are encum-
bered, and women are forced to accept the choices men make. Men often control
decision-making regarding contraception and decision of contraception of female
partners, which can impede contraceptive use as well as increase risk for contra-
ceptive failure. Male participation is about being responsible and respectful instead
of only being about decision-making. It should extend to the role of men as enablers
and beneficiaries in the process of ensuring dignity, equal voice, and reproductive
rights for women.
Another target of SDG 5 focuses on ensuring equal sociopolitical and economic
opportunities for and participation of women, in addition to the recognition of
unpaid and domestic work done by women.
If we look at our country’s progress in women’s status since Independence, we
can see a remarkable improvement in the position of Indian women. Educational
opportunities for girls and women have expanded. Employment opportunities in
new occupations have gone up, wages and incomes have gone up, occupational
mobility has improved. Nevertheless, there persist several challenges and dis-
crimination against women. It is the dominant belief that the place of women is at
home. A majority of women do not have the freedom to decide whether or not to
work. When we look at data on employment and especially trends, it is important to
136 P. Muttreja
understand the circumstances that make women opt for work. Some educated
families have reservations about their daughters-in-law working while a woman in
urban slums has no option but to work. The Economic survey 2018 states that the
employment of women in the workforce has declined from 36% employed in 2005–
06 to 24% in 2015–16, despite an increase in the number of educated women (The
Economic Survey 2017).
It is also widely believed that the opportunity cost of women’s time is negligible.
Close to 90% of India’s workforce is employed in the informal or unorganized
sector (The Economic Survey 2017). Most women in the unorganized sector work
long hours—often longer than men, get paid very little, and have no health
insurance, pension plan or any social security. Discrimination exists not only in
terms of wage rates, but working conditions are unequal too. Then there is other
unpaid work done by women—be it childcare, cooking, running the house, or
looking after the elderly-which is not given due recognition in our society. Studies
examining gender differences among family-caregivers of mental health patients
have demonstrated that women spend more time providing care than men. As a
result of the caregiving burden, women experience greater mental and physical
strain and higher levels of psychological distress. The ‘Maternity Amendment Act
2017’ brought the very welcome increase in maternity leave from 12 to 26 weeks
and mandated employers having at least 50 employees to provide crèche facility to
new mothers (The Maternity Amendment (Benefit) Act 2017). The government’s
efforts to extend paid maternity leave in the formal sector is aimed at benefiting
women, however, many women have received a backlash from employers, further
undermining Indian women’s job prospects. The issue of extended maternity leave
requires attention and a comprehensive approach and not just a one-sided Act.
SDG 5 also highlights the need to eliminate all forms of violence and dis-
crimination against women. The stranglehold of adverse social norms is an
under-recognized impediment to the advancement of women’s health even today.
Despite the impressive increase in per capita incomes over the past decade, the
proportion of women who agreed that the husband is justified in beating his wife
under some circumstances such as when a woman shows disrespect for her in-laws,
if she argues with him and if she neglects the house or children fell only marginally
from 54% in 2005–06 to 52% in 2015–16 (National Family Health Survey-4 India
Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS 2015; National Family Health Survey-3 India Factsheet.
Mumbai IIPS 2005). The Economic Survey 2018 talks about addressing the deep,
ingrained societal issues of gender inequality and how this reflects in the education
and reproductive, as well as the economic agency of women in the country (The
Economic Survey 2017). To quote the Economic survey 2018, ‘In some sense, once
born, the lives of women are improving, but society still appears to want fewer of
them to be born’. This is also reflected in the 2 million women who reportedly go
missing across all age groups every year in India (The Economic Survey 2017).
Moving forward, program-makers and implementers should make sustained
efforts, through special and differentiated strategies, in reaching out to most
marginalized groups of population, especially women in remote rural areas and
those belonging to disadvantaged societal groups. Given the large proportion of
population in the reproductive age group, there is a need to invest more on spacing
methods besides focusing on specific sexual and reproductive health strategies for
adolescents and youth to address their needs. If India wants to take advantage of its
young population, clearly the country needs to urgently and massively step up
investments in improving health, nutrition, and social conditions. The last mile is
always the most exhausting, exasperating and difficult to cover. As India moves
towards providing universal health coverage under the Ayushman Bharat,
Government should give a big push to ensure that services reach every home in
every remote corner so that universal health coverage becomes a reality.
4 Harnessing Our Demographic Dividend—A Differential

Approach Towards Sustainable Development
While the world population is growing older with higher dependency ratio, India
will continue to enjoy for some time a distinct advantage of having a younger
population, which will influence the country’s development, economic and social
investment decisions in accordance with the rising aspirations of young people.
India is set to become the most populous country in the world by 2024, ahead of
China, but it is simultaneously undergoing a demographic transition where although
the population continues to grow, the rate of growth continues to decline consis-
tently (World Population Data Sheet 2018). An important consequence of this rapid
fertility decline is the potential advantage of the demographic dividend due to rise
in the share of working-age population, implying a fall in the dependency ratio.
With 50% of India’s population below the age of 25 and 66% below the age of
35 years (National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet 2015), the country is in
a unique position to reap benefits of its demographic dividend, provided adequate
and timely investments towards the needs of our young citizens are made. There is
clear evidence that the population momentum, given the large base of young people
in the country, is the greatest driver of India’s population growth. Given the age
structure, we will witness a growth in population over the next 30 years giving us a
window of three decades to capitalize on this opportunity, making now the best
time to push for greater investments in family planning. With quality education,
different skill-building initiatives and identifying employment pathways, depen-
dency ratios will decline. With greater labour force participation rates, increased per
capita resources for investment in poverty reduction and human capital develop-
ment, India can witness economic growth and better living standards even with a
high population.
In 2015, as per World Development Indicators of the World Bank, India had a
total workforce of 503.8 million (World Bank 2015). Between 2011–2016, India
had an additional labour force participation of 6.6 million per year (World Bank
2015). These numbers mandate greater investments in skill development to ensure
suitable and adequate employment opportunities for the new entrants in the work
138 P. Muttreja
force. There is a huge gap between the requirements of the job market, in terms of
skill set, and the level/kind of skills available with the working-age population.
Despite being educated, a large section of the educated workforce possesses little or
no job skills, largely owing to the lack of vocational training in the formal education
system in the country, resulting in severe deficit of trained and quality labour force.
It is the need of the hour to assess and transform the traditional approach to
education and skill development in the country and lay equal emphasis to both
quality education and vocational training among the young population.
The pressures of an extremely competitive and inflexible education system have
resulted in rising incidents of suicide in educational institutes in India. Every hour,
one student commits suicide in India, according to 2015 data from the National
Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) (Crime in India Statistics 2015). Additionally,
much of India’s youth aging 21–25 years have been struggling with unemployment
or low income leading to mental health issues and increase in suicide rates. About
70% of suicide victims in 2015 had an income of less than Rs.100,000 per annum,
according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data (Crime in India
Statistics 2015).
While the instances of mental health issues are on the rise in the country, there is
severe scarcity of psychologists, psychiatrists and social workers working in the
field. According to a report by National Institute of Mental Health and
NeuroSciences (NIMHANS) at least 13.7% of India’s population had various
mental disorders in 2017 with 10.6% of them requiring immediate attention
(National Mental Health Survey of India 2015). Mental health workforce in India
(per 100,000 population) includes psychiatrists (0.3), nurses (0.12), psychologists
(0.07) and social workers (0.07), which are extremely inadequate numbers given
the size of the population needing intervention (National Mental Health Survey of
India 2015). Mental health has attracted comparatively less public health attention
in India and there is an urgent need to ensure the preparedness of the public health
system to provide stigma-free, systematic and specialized mental health services.
And while we draw attention to mental health problems, the focus of the public
health system should not be limited to it. It should be committed to providing
assured, affordable, equitable, universally accessible and integrated health services
to the people. The recently announced Ayushman Bharat Programme, by the
Government of India, is a promising first step in this direction and has put the
agenda of health and its social determinants as the top policy priority of the
Government. The holistic health care approach aims for integrated intervention in
primary, secondary and tertiary care systems, laying emphasis on both prevention
and promotion aspects. Ayushman Bharat aims to bring a paradigm shift in the
government’s health care strategy, by addressing health holistically, in primary,
secondary and tertiary care systems, emphasizing on both preventive and promotive
measures. It is hoped that Ayushman Bharat will contribute in reducing:
(i) in-patient hospitalisation, which has increased by 300% during the last 10 years
(NSSO 2015); and (ii) out of pocket expenditure, which leads to approximately 6
million families getting into poverty due to catastrophic health expenditures (NSSO
2015).
Ayushman Bharat has two flagship programmes:

1. First, the Health and Wellness Centres (HWC), which seek to provide all
primary level healthcare for diseases and illnesses at the village level itself.
Towards this, 1.5 lakh existing Sub Centers (SCs) and Primary Health Centers
(PHCs) will be transformed into HWCs to ensure universal access to expanded
range comprehensive primary health care services free of cost. In addition, to
control lifestyle-related diseases, the Centre will provide the necessary training
and counselling. Family Planning, Contraceptive Services and other
Reproductive Health Care Services are one of the 12 services mandated to be
provided through the Health and Wellness Centers.
2. Secondly, we have the National Health Protection Scheme for 10.74 crore
poor and needy families who would benefit from the scheme. This provides free
secondary and tertiary care treatment for serious illnesses. Through this,
approximately 50 crore nationals will be able to avail of free treatment up to Rs.
5 lakh per year for secondary and tertiary care hospitalisation. As per National
Health Authority website, more than 26 lakh people benefitted from the scheme
by end of May 2019.
Its success is critical for the country’s healthcare development and could play a
significant role in reducing healthcare costs borne by the households. This vision
requires a strong regulatory framework, clear financial outlays and implementation
plans. The state and center need to work together and also leverage the resources,
skills and expertize of the private sector. Equitable access to health services would
require maintaining the continuum of care and ensuring a strong community-based
monitoring system supported by community health workers. Separate strategies will
need to be developed for groups such as adolescents. An adolescent strategy, for
instance, must be comprehensive, inter-sectoral and must focus on
adolescent-specific issues.
We need to provide quality sexual and reproductive health services with right
messages on reproductive choices, particularly to our youth and adolescents. The
Guttmacher- Lancet Commission’s 2018 report on sexual and reproductive health
and rights acknowledged the gaps in fulfilling the SRHR needs of individuals,
communities and economies across the world and the need to adopt a holistic and
stigma-free approach on access to SRHR services in order to ensure health and
human rights for all. The report recommends nations to expand access to a com-
prehensive and essential package of SRH interventions, which would include more
common components such as contraceptive services, maternal and new born care
and treatment of HIV/AIDS. In addition, the package should also include the less
common components such as comprehensive sexuality education, safe abortion
services, counseling, prevention and awareness regarding cervical cancer and
gender-based violence (Starrs et al. 2018). Our population can be turned into an
asset rather than a liability if we know the knack of turning it into a productive
investment (Starrs et al. 2018).
Therefore, there is a greater need today to step up budget allocations to
accommodate the growing contraceptive requirements of the India’s population in
140 P. Muttreja
the reproductive age group. The family planning budget has remained 4% of the
National Health Mission budget since the year 2014–15. Only about 60% of the
allocated family planning budgets are utilized. India is a young nation with 53% of
the population in the reproductive age group (15 to 49 years). 13% currently
married women have an unmet need for family planning; indicating that about 30
million currently married women, who do not want to get pregnant or do not want
any more children are not using contraceptives for various reasons. Additionally,
the unmet need for family planning stands at 22.2% (approx. 11 million) among
young currently married women (15–24 years), who need access to quality family
planning services and spacing methods of contraception. Given this, it is imperative
to increase the utilisation of existing family planning budgets and expand its
resource envelope. There is an urgent need to review the costs required to achieve
family planning requirements and ensure an annual increase in allocations and
expenditures.
The National Health Policy 2017 envisages increasing public health spending
from 1.15% of GDP to 2.5% of GDP by 2025 (National Health Policy 2017). Such
efforts to achieve Universal Health Coverage will subsequently strengthen India’s
commitment to ensure universal access to family planning services by 2030.
Despite good policies in place, inadequate budgetary allocations for family plan-
ning prevent translation of commitments into results. The family planning com-
ponent receives merely 4% of the total budget available under the National Health
Mission’s Reproductive and Child Health (RCH) Flexi pool (National Health
Mission Financial Management Report 2016). Government needs to ensure ade-
quate funding in order to improve the quality of and access to family planning
services. Greater investments in family planning will bear positive dividends for the
country’s future and its efforts in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals.
Furthermore, the allocations and programmes should be synchronized to reflect
the need to shift focus from limiting to spacing methods and activities that drive
demand and cater to unmet need. Availability of a greater resource envelope for
family planning in the national and state health budgets and accelerated spending,
specifically across states with high fertility (TFR) such as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh
can result in higher economic output, greater savings and return on investments as a
result of reductions in fertility in the country.
5 Cost of Inaction in Family Planning
While family planning is extremely cost-effective public health measures and a

developmental ‘best buy’ for any nation, insufficient investments, on the other
hand, can have grave consequences for individuals, communities and economies.
Inaction in family planning will have a disturbing influence on several fronts—it
can disrupt the growth equilibrium and result in loss to economy and will affect men
and women in terms of not only the ability to plan their families, but also their
overall wellbeing, their ability to continue the education of children, their overall
earnings and use of health services as a result of complementarities between dif-

ferent actions. The eventual outcomes would include increased dependency rates,
lower workforce participation, diminished investments, slower economic growth,
and reduction in productivity and savings, weaker progress on gender issues
including wage equity. These factors would cumulatively collude to a delay
meeting our development targets, including the realization of the Sustainable
Development Goals by 2030.
Against this background, a recent study by the Population Foundation of India,
called ‘Cost of Inaction in Family Planning in India: An Analysis of Health and
Economic Implications’ delves into the opportunity costs of investing in family
planning and the associated consequences of inaction (Population Foundation of
India 2018). The study was undertaken at the national level, with particular focus on
the four large states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. These
constitute 37% of the country’s population and also lag behind in most family
planning indicators. In terms of the methodology, the study examines and compares
potential costs and benefits to the nation over the course of 15 years, from 2016 to
2031, in the context of two scenarios (i) ‘Current scenario’ where strategies for
family planning continue as they are and (ii) ‘Policy scenario’ where family
planning programmes are implemented to their full extent in order to achieve the
goals set in the national and respective states’ population policies.
The key findings of the study focus on demographic and health consequences,
economic gains from increased family planning investments, budgetary savings to
the government and savings on out of pocket expenditure to households. The
projected demographic and health gains of the policy scenario include prevention of
2.9 million infant deaths, 1.2 million maternal deaths, 206 million unsafe abortions
and 69 million additional births at the national level. The Potential benefits of
investing in family planning include savings of up to 270 billion Rupees to the
National Health Mission budget. Households could potentially save 776 billion
rupees or 20% of their out of pocket health expenditure. The policy scenario could
lead to an additional 13% increase in per capita GDP.
Keeping the large young population in mind, we need to provide quality sexual
and reproductive health services and ensure informed reproductive choices. We
need to identify the priority health concerns, especially reproductive health, family
planning needs, increased investments and right kind of allocations—enhancing
reproductive choices and awareness levels of the population through effective
behaviour change communication strategies. The magnitude of savings projected by
the study clearly elucidates the benefits of greater investments in family planning
for the individuals, economy, government and households. It conveys an important
message to different stakeholders engaged in population development to scale up
positive behaviour change communication strategies in order to address family
planning issues. It also emphasizes the need for prioritizing and strengthening
family planning initiatives across states along with increased budget allocations and
effective utilization of money available for family planning. To reduce out of pocket
expenditure on childbirth and child hospitalization, policymakers must ensure
Universal Health Coverage for maternal and child health with a focus on providing
142 P. Muttreja
quality family planning services and improve its access to remote and under-served
areas. Additional per capita income gains are bound to increase the overall standard
of living of the population, increase their productivity levels and dependency ratios.
6 Need for Investing in Behaviour Change

Communication
Health is not just a physical problem; it is an outcome of social attitudes, which

cannot be addressed in isolation. Women’s health impacts the whole family and
society, economically, sociologically, and psychologically and hence it is important
for women to be viewed as agents of change instead of burdens or beneficiaries.
Although family planning programmes in India have made significant progress over
the years, the larger issues surrounding family planning and sexual and reproduc-
tive health emerge from deeply entrenched social norms, which cannot be uprooted
overnight. Social and behaviour change Communication (SBCC) interventions
have proven effective in several health areas, such as increase in contraceptive use,
spreading awareness regarding non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and improving
maternal and new born health.
SBCC can be a critical player in addressing and transforming socio-cultural
norms surrounding issues such as but not limited to family planning, son preference
and sex selection, child marriage, early pregnancies, gender inequality and violence.
The audience members have varying levels of openness and willingness towards
sexual and reproductive health and family planning. While SBCC interventions can
be contextualized to any sector or community, they can greatly influence the health
and well being of the society by motivating people to adopt and sustain healthy
behaviours and lifestyle.
There is a dire need to develop and share information on sexual and reproductive
health and family planning among India’s young men and women, those who are
stepping into the reproductive phase of their lives, and at the same time being
influenced and shaped by societal norms. The findings from a recent study by the
Population Council, underscore adolescents’ limited awareness of sexual and
reproductive matters (Population Council 2017). Due to regressive social norms,
discussions on sexual and reproductive health and rights are discouraged within
families, communities, and even among peers. Frontline health workers, an over-
worked and under-skilled cadre that forms the tenuous link to health service
delivery network are ill equipped to deliver behaviour change.
An increasing number of SBCC interventions are being designed and imple-
mented in the public health sector globally, quite a few of which focus on demand
generation for family planning and contraceptive services using powerful tools like
mass media, community outreach, interpersonal communication and the more
recently digital media. While it is a recognized fact that access to modern methods
of contraception is crucial for promoting reproductive, maternal and child health,
access to and choice of contraceptive products and services, it is greatly governed

by several underlying factors, which are sometimes heavily context-driven. An
effective SBCC intervention design for family planning incorporates key messages
and information on family planning, which address key barriers and enabling
factors pertaining to the target audience. Social norms surrounding sexual and
reproductive health include religious beliefs, status of women, societal support
including support from the partner, traditions, myths and misconceptions sur-
rounding contraception and the political environment in the country. In societies
where contraceptives are still viewed as taboo, clients are often faced with
healthcare provider bias towards certain client groups (like unmarried youth and
adolescents). SBCC interventions in family planning programmes facilitate a
conducive social environment by addressing socio-cultural norms and bringing
social acceptability towards family planning practices among women, their part-
ners, healthcare providers and society as a whole.
Over the years, entertainment education (EE) or simply edutainment has proven
to be a successful SBCC strategy to transform deep-seated societal norms. As a
concept edutainment is content-driven and weaves an underlying social message
within the contours of entertainment. It increases positive attitudes and behaviours
by weaving in these messages into a compelling story that entertains while also
educating and providing positive nudges to its audiences. The composition of these
key messages should reflect contexts such as the socio-economic category, edu-
cation, gender and age of the target audience. These factors would also decide
appropriate communication channels bearing in mind. For instance, the growing
reach and demand for digital media in the country makes it an ideal platform for
designing a youth-centric SBCC intervention. A compelling narrative is extremely
relatable for the audience and the viewers inadvertently form, what is called a
parasocial relationship with an onscreen character (a one-sided relationship
developed between the audience member and the persona of a character on screen),
often emulating their positive behaviour and making a transformational shift in their
opinions and life. These changes in social norms, in turn, facilitate an enabling
environment for interpersonal communication on topics that might have previously
been considered taboo.
We need to focus on strengthening communications for behaviour change,
engaging with the audience, and above all, on creating an enabling environment for
change to take place. This is substantiated by Population Foundation of India’s
experience in leveraging the power of entertainment education to change social
norms through its trans-media initiative ‘Main Kuch Bhi Kar Sakti Hoon- I, A
Woman, Can Achieve Anything’ (MKBKSH) (Main Kuch Bhi Kar Sakti Hoon-I).
Apart from the telecast cumulatively reaching to millions, the series has triggered
conversations (and change) in homes, local communities and the media on
women’s sexual and reproductive health, their rights and domestic violence.
MKBKSH is a trans-media entertainment education initiative, a high impact
television and radio show, that was designed to trigger positive change in attitude,
behaviour and social norms around early marriage, family planning, gender
equality, violence against women and sex selection, among several other issues.
144 P. Muttreja
The vision of MKBKSH was to use edutainment as a catalyst and trigger positive
changes by creating a ‘new normal’ within society where women have equal rights,
access and agency. The series highlighted several pro-social themes such as pro-
moting non-coercive family planning including women and child health, building
awareness against child marriage, early pregnancy and son preference, promoting
birth spacing, improving quality of healthcare, and eliminating gender-based vio-
lence. MKBKSH weaved in messages to provide women with the tools to act out
their own intentions, transform power relations within the family and engage with
men as responsible partners, ultimately unleashing a tool of social transformation
that could enable young girls and women with choice, voice and the power to act.
The MKBKSH Interactive Voice Response System (IVRS) was used to encourage
listener clubs to leave feedback questions and an independent analysis of the
real-time IVRS showed that the IVRS registered 1.7 million calls from more than
390,000 unique phone numbers across 29 Indian states. The IVRS played a critical
role in ensuring the efficacy of the MKBKSH initiative for social change. It pro-
vided timely and authentic, user-generated feedback for programmatic improve-
ment and allowed real-time tracking of audience engagement (Wang and Singhal
2017).
Evaluation surveys conducted at the end of seasons 1 and 2 of MKBKSH clearly
demonstrated a positive shift in knowledge, attitude and perception among viewers.
MKBKSH has opened a critical space for familial and spousal discussions on use of
contraceptives, delaying first pregnancy and family planning. Among respondents,
75% of the married women and 85% of the married men watched the serial with
their spouses and 55% married women exposed to the serial initiated discussion on
various themes with their spouses. 79% of the youth viewers were aware of the
legal age of marriage for both boys and girls. 92% of youth male and 98% of youth
female viewers reported that they wanted to get married after the age of 21 and
18 years, respectively. 59% of youth viewers believed that 21–25 years was the
ideal age for the first pregnancy. 71.2% of youth viewers believed that there should
be at least 3 years of spacing between two pregnancies. 66% of youth viewers
believed that the woman has the right to decide the number of children she wants to
have. 66% of the married female viewers of the serial and 64% of the youth claimed
that MKBKSH had provided them exclusive information on various on family
planning and gender-based issues which they could not obtain from other sources.
Of the married women who said they received exclusive information from the series
about various issues (mostly on use of contraceptives), over 75% said that the
information they got was on issues they were too embarrassed to ask/talk to others
about (Main Kuch Bhi Kar Sakti Hoon-I).
These results underline the fact that a well-designed SBCC initiative can suc-
cessfully meet the increasing demand for information on pertinent issues sur-
rounding family planning. Furthermore, the substantial numbers of MKBKSH
evaluation respondents who reported to have received information on family
planning exclusively from MKBKSH shows the lack of well-disseminated infor-
mation on the subject. Although there have been successful examples of initiatives
like MKBKSH, not all edutainment interventions end up being as effective as those
based on rigorous and robust formative research evidence, that have mass appeal
going hand in hand with the key messages and that employ a 360 degree approach,
which means, they are sustained through a number of channels overtime to ensure
better recall and reinforcement of key messages among the audience. To ensure all
of the above, edutainment interventions need to be sustained and long-term
investment to effectively initiate the process of sustainable social and behaviour
change.
While SBCC interventions undoubtedly have tremendous potential in improving
health awareness and transforming regressive norms, it can at times be difficult to
measure behaviour change given the fact that deep-seated norms don’t change
overnight and it could be a while before interventions show visible results. And if
and when behaviour change does happen, it is important to remember that measured
changes in health practices are a combination of several factors (such as
improvement in services, better-trained staff, etc.) and cannot be solely attributed to
a particular intervention. It is, therefore, necessary to incorporate an evaluation
design right from the beginning of the intervention and periodically monitor the
effectiveness among the audience and also recognize errors in perception, if any.
Health care providers and community health workers play a crucial role in
promoting behaviour change and healthy behaviour within communities, as they are
the first point of contact for majority of the community members. Hence adequate
investment in training of health workers, including their communication skills, can
not only raise awareness about family planning services but also lead to an increase
in the number of women opting for contraception in the long run and making an
informed decision about their choice of contraceptive by understanding their side
effects and complications. Given the fact that community health workers and
healthcare providers belong to the same social setting as their clients and are at risk
of suffering from similar social biases surrounding contraception, contextual and
task-based training is extremely crucial for them. They must be free from their own
personal biases and judgmental beliefs to be able to fight against it. Health workers
require constant reinforcement to change long-held perceptions of clients and roles
to start conversations to generate sufficient interest in the topic and catalyze future
conversations.
7 Conclusion
The broad scope of the SDG commitments has a distinct underlying message-
creating a just, secure and equitable world requires a holistic and cross-sectoral
vision, where the people as well as policy makers renounce their vertical view of
problems that plague our communities and societies. Instead, these issues need to be
viewed as interlinked and interdependent. Whether it is poverty, sustainable eco-
nomic growth or climate change- these disparate goals have cross-linked dimen-
sions which need to be reflected in the nation’s strategic and implementation plan
for the achievement of the SDGs.
146 P. Muttreja
In the 2018 human development (HDI) rankings released by the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), India ranked 130 out of 189 nations (Human
development Reports. Statistical Update 2018). 26.8% of India’s HDI value is lost
on account of gender inequalities- confirming that inequality remains a challenge
for India as it progresses economically (Human development Reports. Statistical
Update 2018). In this era of digital disruption, mass-mediated storytelling using
behaviour change communication strategies can challenge and transform
deep-seated societal norms and make a significant difference to women’s lives.
While there are greater educational and employment opportunities for women since
independence and employment and earnings bring financial autonomy to women,
we need to ensure that they are ‘empowered’ or independent enough to make their
own decisions, including having a say in planning their families.
If we want to achieve the ultimate goal of promoting greater independence and
empowerment among our women and girls, we need to focus on overcoming
structural barriers impeding the process. The economic gains for the nation can be
much higher when female education and labour force participation are promoted
and enabled. Development policies and initiatives in the country should actively
promote avenues for economic empowerment of women by supporting their edu-
cation and employment in skill-based industries and services.
Given the evidence of its economic benefits it is clear that investing in family
planning makes millions of rupees and a lot of sense. Family Planning is a smart
investment, critical for the health and wellbeing of women, families and commu-
nities, and must be integrated across the range of country’s development initiatives.
On the other hand, inaction in family planning will have a disturbing influence on
several fronts—it can disrupt the growth equilibrium of the nation on several fronts.
The time is now, to harness India’s demographic advantage and greater investments
are made in the needs of India’s young population, including their sexual and
reproductive needs.
Universal access to family planning and reproductive choices is not the only path
to sustainable development, but without addressing these issues, the impact and
effectiveness of other interventions will doubtfully be as potent. It is, therefore, the
need of the hour to strengthen governance through debates, discussions and create
awareness on the SDGs. There is a need to convene dialogues across boundaries
where every sector has a role in co-creating interventions. All key actors need to get
together to solve problems. Government, NGOs and corporates need to learn to
work systemically together to bring about a systemic change. Ultimately, however,
if we are to get there, it will require men and women, at all levels, to embrace and
promote diversity and inclusion. Achieving SDGs and ensuring that nobody gets
left behind is not a far-off goal for India, all that is needed is for it to be prioritized
as part of the social and political agenda of the country.
References
Copenhagen Consensus. (2014). Preliminary Benefit-Cost Assessment for 12th Session OWG
Goals. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/owg12.cost-beneftassessment.pdf.
Census. (2011). Office of the registrar general & census commissioner. Ministry of Home Affairs.
Government of India. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/CensusData2011.html.
Census. (2001). Office of the Registrar General & Census Commissioner. Ministry of Home
Affairs. Government of India. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-common/census_data_
2001.html.
Crime in India Statistics. (2015). National Crime Records Bureau. Ministry of Home Affairs.
http://ncrb.gov.in/StatPublications/CII/CII2015/FILES/CrimeInIndia2015.pdf.
Cleland, J., Conde-Agudelo, A., Peterson, H., et al. (2012). Contraception and health. Lancet, 380
(9837), 149–156.
Family Planning Saves Lives. (2009). Population Reference Bureau. http://www.prb.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/10/familyplanningsaveslives.pdf.
Family Planning. (2020). India commitments. http://www.familyplanning2020.org/india.
GBD. (2015). SDG Collaborators (2016) Measuring the health-related Sustainable Development
Goals in 188 countries: A baseline analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015.
Lancet, 388, 1813–1850.
Government of India, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. (2013). A strategic approach to
reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health (RMNCH+A) in India. http://
www.nhm.gov.in/images/pdf/RMNCH+A/RMNCH+A_Strategy.pdf.
Human development Reports. Statistical Update. (2018). United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP). http://hdr.undp.org/en/2018-update.
India, G. o. National Health Mission. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. http://www.nhm.
gov.in/nrhm-components/rmnch-a/family-planning/background.html.
International Conference on Population and Development. (1994). http://www.un.org/popin/icpd2.
htm.
Knowledge for Health. (2016). Family planning and sustainable development goals. http://www.
k4health.org/resources/family-planning-and-sustainable-development-goals.
Main Kuch Bhi Kar Sakti Hoon-I, A Woman, Can Achieve Anything, http://mkbksh.com/.
National Family Health Survey-4 India Factsheet. Mumbai IIPS. 2015–2016.
National Population Policy. (2000). Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Government of India.
https://mohfw.gov.in/sites/default/files/269537556414109494690%20%281%29.pdf.
National Health Mission Financial Management Report. (2016–2017). Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare. Government of India.
National Health Policy. (2017). Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. Government of India.
https://mohfw.gov.in/sites/default/files/9147562941489753121.pdf.
National Mental Health Survey of India 2015–2016. (2017). Indian J Psychiatry, 59(1), 21–26.
Population Council. (2017). UDAYA-Understanding the lives of adolescents and young adults:
Bihar and UP Factsheet 2016.
Population Foundation of India. (2018). Cost of inaction in Family Planning in India: An analysis
of health and economic implications. Population Foundation of India. http://
populationfoundation.in/files/fileattached/Fileattached-1539344871-COI_in_PFI_10102018.
pdf.
Post. (2015). Consensus. http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/post-2015-consensus.
Singh, S., Shekhar, C., Acharya, R., et al. (2018). The incidence of abortion and unintended
pregnancy in India, 2015. Lancet Glob Health, 6(1), e111–e120.
Singh, S., et al. (2009). Adding it up: The costs and benefits of investing in Family Planning and
maternal and newborn health. New York: Guttmacher Institute and United Nations Population
Fund.
148 P. Muttreja
Starbird, E., Norton, M., & Marcus, R. (2016). Investing in Family Planning: Key to achieving the
sustainable development goals. Global Health: Science and Practice, 4(2), 191–210.
Starrs, A., Ezeh, A., Barker, B. et al. (2018). Accelerate progress—sexual and reproductive health
and rights for all: Report of the Guttmacher—Lancet Commission. Lancet, 391(10140), 2642–
2692.
The Economic Survey. (2017–2018). Ministry of Finance. Government of India. http://mofapp.nic.
in:8080/economicsurvey/.
The Maternity Amendment (Benefit) Act. (2017) https://labour.gov.in/sites/default/files/Maternity
%20Benefit%20Amendment%20Act%2C2017%20.pdf.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2017). World
Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision. DVD Edition.
World Population Data Sheet. (2018). Population Reference Bureau. http://www.prb.org/2018-
world-population-data-sheet-with-focus-on-changing-age-structures.
World Bank. (2015). World Development Indicators. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator?tab=all.
Wang, H., & Singhal, A. (2017). Unfurling the voicebook of Main Kuch Bhi Kar Sakti Hoon:
Real-time audience engagement, rising fandom, and spurring of prosocial actions. New Delhi:
Population Foundation of India.
Youth in India. (2017). Ministry of statistics and programme implementation. Government of
India. http://mospi.nic.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Youth_in_India-2017.pdf.
Chapter 7
SDG 10—A Probe into the Factors
Underlying Differences in Inequality:
Evidence at the Sub-national Level
in India
Rudra Prosad Roy and Saikat Sinha Roy
Abstract This study is an endeavor to examine the causes of rising inequality in

India at the sub-national level and thus to arrive at policy implications in order to
achieve targets under SDG 10. In a country like India, with striking heterogeneity,
examining inequality at the more disaggregated level and understanding its causes
is essential for sound policy making. Since the beginning of the economic reform in
1991, there has been a rising income inequality in India has been a cause for
concern. Owing to opening up of the economy, the growth rates in states output
have increased rapidly especially after 1993. This seems to have widened the
income gap. However, thus far only a few studies have attempted to analyze the
causes of rising inequalities in Indian states. This study, analyzing data from 18
major Indian states, finds that, in the post reforms period, structural transformation
and trade liberalization cause inequality to increase in Indian states. On the other
hand, the evidence on infrastructure leading to rise in inequality has to be dealt with
caution on account of the presence of outliers. These results are believed to have
important policy implications.
Keywords Inequality Structural transformation Trade Infrastructure

JEL Classification D31 D63
R. P. Roy S. Sinha Roy (&)

Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, 188, Raja S.C. Mallick Rd,
700032 Kolkata, India
e-mail: saikat.sinharoy@jadavpuruniversity.in
R. P. Roy
e-mail: rudraprosadroy@gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_7
150 R. P. Roy and S. Sinha Roy
1 Introduction
Although the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were successful with

respect to its major fronts, many principals that were outlined in the Millennium
Declaration have remained unnoticed. The MDGs also ignored the rising disparities
at the regional level and also among some specific groups of population as it was
mainly focused on the global and national averages. The post-2015 Development
Agenda such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) considered the Rio+20
promises to “strive for a world that is just, equitable and inclusive”. The SDGs
guarantees reduction of inter-country and intra-country inequalities along with
poverty eradication and at the same time inclusion of disempowered, marginalized
and excluded groups. The reduction of inequalities is included in the specified
targets of SDGs and the present study is an endeavor to suggest how these targets
can be met through various policy initiatives.
SDG 10, among the seventeen goals that constitutes the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development, is to “reduce inequality within and among countries”.
Specific targets under the 10th goal are presented in Box 1 below. Unlike MDGs,
targets in SDGs related to reduce inequality seems more comprehensive in refer-
ence to both “within” and “among” countries give importance to inequality
reduction for all countries, not necessarily only developing ones. If we look into the
targets under SDG 10, we find that the structural factors, including lack of fiscal,
wage and social policies, discrimination, lack of representation etc., underlie the
incidence of inequality. Hence, the targets set under SDG 10 have an extensive
scope. Now the importance of each target can be briefly discussed. This goal thus
provides a framework to countries for achieving and sustaining income growth to
the bottom 4% of the population at a rate higher than the same at the national level.
In turn, this will increase empowerment, social promotion, and political inclusions
for all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or eco-
nomic status, not to mention that the preconditions for higher growth will be laid.1
This study is an endeavor to examine the causes of rising inequality in India at
the sub-national level and thus to arrive at policy implications in order to achieve
targets under SDG 10. Issues related to income inequality and wealth distribution
can be studied mainly due to two reasons. Firstly, reduction of inequality has some
philosophical and ethical grounds. Second and more importantly, rising inequality
has impact on other economic features, and thus although it can be ignored at an
intrinsic level, it cannot be ignored at the functional level. Rising inequality can
1
There is an extensive literature dealing with inequality and growth. While Berg et al. (2012), Berg
and Ostry (2011) and Easterly (2007), among others, show the inverse relationship between
inequality and growth, Galore and Zeira, (1993) show that inequality adversely affects the for-
mation of social capital and in a way constrains an economy’s capability to use exogenous
technological possibilities to its advantage, Barro (2000) is of the view that inequality, in a limited
way, is necessary in developing countries as it allows few individuals to accumulate start-up
capital. Roy and Sinha Roy (2017) provide cross-country evidence on the issue, and the result is
found to hold good across different measures of inequality.
7 SDG 10—A Probe into the Factors Underlying Differences … 151
lead to concentration of political and decision making powers in the hands of a few,
and thus by leading towards a suboptimal use of resources that may raise the
chances of political and economic crises, may have significant implications for
economic growth and macroeconomic stability in an economy.
Box 1: Sustainable Development Goals and Inequality

Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries
10.1 by 2030 progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the
bottom 40% of the population at a rate higher than the national average
10.2 by 2030 empower and promote the social, economic and political
inclusion of all irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin,
religion or economic or other status
10.4 adopt policies especially fiscal, wage, and social protection policies
and progressively achieve greater equality
10.5 improve regulation and monitoring of global financial markets and
institutions and strengthen implementation of such regulations
10.6 ensure enhanced representation and voice of developing countries in
decision making in global international economic and financial institutions in
order to deliver more effective, credible, accountable and legitimate
institutions
10.7 facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility
of people, including through implementation of planned and well-managed
migration policies
Source: Sustainable Development Goals, Knowledge Platform, United
Nation
The aim of this study is to understand the possible determinants of consumption

inequality at the sub-national level in India. Although there are a large volume of
studies on determinants and possible outcomes of income inequalities, a very few
studies have observed inequality at the regional/provincial level within a country on
account of paucity of comparable data. There are some studies investigating into the
relationship between income inequality and economic growth for the American
states and regions of single European Union (EU) countries [see, for example,
Topel (1994), Partridge (1997, 2005, 2006), Fallah and Partridge (2006), Panizza
(2002), Wu et al. (2006), Frank (2008), Galbraith and Garcilazo (2005),
Monastiriotis (2000), Goerlich and Mas (2001), Cannari and D’Alessio (2003)]. For
example, Panizza (2002) studies the nature of the relationship between income
distribution and economic growth considering data for 48 states of the continental
US and finds a strong negative relationship between income inequality and growth.
Partidge (2005) using US sub-national—level data finds a contrasting result after
allowing for short run and long run responses and separate effects between the tails
and middle of the distribution.
Studies that have checked for determinants of income inequality at the

sub-national level are even scarce. Wu et al. (2006), using time series data for the
50 US states between 1981 and 1997 and welfare indexes like Atkinson welfare
index, Gini index, coefficient of variation of income, and the relative mean devi-
ation of income, studies the effect of eight major government policies on welfare.
They find that the effects of government policies are qualitatively similar but
quantitatively different in nature in rural and urban areas. Perugini and Martino
(2008), using data on income inequality at the sub-national level in the EU, show
that inequality depends upon national level factors (especially the institutional
settings of the labour market and welfare state) and also on regional labour market
features. The study also observes that more regional inequality promotes higher
regional growth. In a different type of study using data from 81 Chinese cities in
2010, 2012 and 2014, Zhang et al. (2019) find that presence of local leader and
larger amount of transfers to low-income households reduce expenditure inequality.
From the aforementioned brief discussion on existing literature on inequality and its
determinants at the sub-national level, two inferences can be drawn. First, the
existing studies have mostly concentrated on developed countries, as there are
inadequacies of data in developing countries. Second, most of the studies have
focused on the causal relationship between income inequality and economic growth
and not on the determinants of inequality at the sub-national levels, especially for
developing countries. Under this circumstance, this study is an endeavor to examine
the determinants of inequality of Indian states.
Even when the Indian economy has been experiencing steady growth in the
recent years, poverty remains a major unease for the policy makers. Except for the
financial crisis period, the Indian economy has been growing at a rate between 6
and 9% per annum in real terms for the last two decades. The reform process was
expected to result in labour-intensive industrialization and a Lewis-style transfor-
mation of economy along with reduction in inequality. However, inequality in India
did not show any nosedive since independence (Chandrasekhar and Ghosh 2015).
Figure 1 shows the pattern of consumption inequality across Indian states in 2012.
Although for poverty reduction, sustained growth is a necessary condition, it is not
sufficient (Ali and Son 2007) as inequality plays a central role here. While con-
siderable attention to poverty reduction have been paid by Indian policy makers,
rising inequality remains a cause for concern as an increase in inequality not only
slows down growth but also obstructs the process of poverty reduction.
To check inequality through estimating Gini coefficients, most of the studies on
India have used National Sample Survey (NSS) data on consumption expenditure.
Some of the studies have mentioned several problems associated with the data of
55th round NSS (1999–2000) (see Sen 2001; Deaton and Dreze 2002; Sen and
Himanshu 2005, etc.) and some others have revised their estimates accordingly (see
Deaton and Dreze 2002; Sundaram and Tendulkar 2003a, b; Sen and Himanshu
2005). On an overall basis, these studies show that between 1993–94 (50th round)
and 1999–2000 (55th round), rural inequality in India has increased significantly.
Using real mean per capita expenditure data, Sen and Himanshu (2005) give the
evidence in favour of increased inequality in the post liberalization period. Using
Bihar
Assam
Rajasthan
Jharkhand
Odisha
Uttarakhand
Gujrat
Punjab
Himachal Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh
Chattisgarh
West Bengal
India
Haryana
Tamilnadu
Maharastra
Karnataka
Kerala
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Fig. 1 Inequality across Indian States in 2012. Source India States Briefs, the World Bank
India Human Development Survey (IHDS)data, the rise of both vertical and hori-
zontal inequality of consumption in India have been shown by Vanneman and
Dubey (2011). Based on the consumption data, Chandrasekhar and Ghosh (2015)
show that from 1993–94 to 2009–10, national Gini coefficient of consumption has
increased from 0.31 to 0.36. Thus, based on several studies on inequality consid-
ering income or consumption distribution, an upward trend in inequality in India
during globalization is clearly evident. However, most of these studies have not
dealt with inequality at the sub-national level. This aspect is especially important
while formulating policies under the SDGs to tackle rising inequality.
The rest of the paper is as follows: Sect. 2 describes data and summary statistics.
Section 3 analyses certain factors that possibly explain income inequality across
Indian states and Sect. 4 concludes the study.
2 Data and Summary Statistics
For the purpose of analysis, data on 18 Indian states, namely Assam, Bihar,
Chattisgargh, Gujrat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala,
Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar
Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal for the years 1994, 2005 and 2012 have been
used. The following table describes the details of data used in this study (Table 1).
Table 2 shows descriptive statistics on Gini coefficient and other macroeconomic
variables used in this study. It can be seen that average inequality in Indian states has
increased from 0.26 in 1994 to 0.29 in 2005 and further to 0.30 in 2012. However,
Table 1 Description of data

S. No. Variable Definition Source
1 Gini The Gini coefficient measures the Consumption expenditure
coefficient extent to which the distribution of surveys conducted by the
consumption expenditure among National Sample Survey Office
households within an economy (NSSO)
deviates from a perfectly equal (Collected from India States
distribution Briefs, the World Bank)
2 Real GSDP Per capita or per person Gross Central Statistical Office (CSO)
per capita State Domestic Product at (Collected from India States
constant (2004–05) prices Briefs, the World Bank)
3 GVA shares Composition or shares of 3 main Central Statistical Office (CSO)
sectors of the economy (Collected from India States
(i) Agriculture/Farm— Briefs, the World Bank)
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
(ii) Industry—Mining,
manufacturing, utilities,
construction
(iii) Services—Trade, transport,
storage, communication, financial
services, real estate, professional
services
4 Electrification Electrification defined as the Consumption expenditure
proportion of households using surveys conducted by the
electricity as primary source of National Sample Survey Office
energy for lighting (NSSO)
(Collected from India States
Briefs, the World Bank)
5 Road density Road density has been defined as Basic Roads Statistics, Transport
road length per 1000 sq. km. Research Wing, Ministry of
Road Transport and Highways
(Collected from India States
Briefs, the World Bank)
6 Trade Export as a percentage of GSDP Economic Surveys (different
Liberalization editions)
Table 2 Descriptive statistics

Variable Mean S.D. Min Max N
Year = 1994
Gini coefficient 0.26 0.03 0.20 0.32 18
Real per capita GSDP 18018.17 5584.18 6655.00 28175.00 18
GVA share of agriculture & allied sector 34.28 8.42 19.00 49.00 18
(%)
GVA share of industry sector (%) 27.61 8.66 10.00 49.00 18
GVA share of services sector (%) 37.94 5.63 28.00 49.00 18
Household electrification (%) 51.89 25.07 11.00 92.00 18
Year = 2005
Gini coefficient 0.29 0.04 0.21 0.36 18
(%)
Road connectivity 1179.00 1010.68 226.00 4362.00 18
Export/GSDP (%) 9.34 8.184 0.64 28.99 18
Year = 2012
Gini coefficient 0.30 0.04 0.22 0.38 18
(%)
Road connectivity 1664.50 1324.53 330.00 5544.00 18
Export/GSDP (%) 11.41 12.13 0.27 52.06 18
Source Authors’ calculation
the variability across states is found to remain more or less similar over time. The
average real per capita incomes of the states has also increased during this time
period. In 1994, the average per capita income of the Indian states was around Rs.
18,019, which then increased to Rs. 27,163 in 2005 and further to Rs. 43,519 in
2012. It can also be inferred that the pace of growth of Indian states was much higher
between 2005 and 2012 than between 1994 and 2005. The variation has also
increased tremendously from 1994 to 2005 and further in 2012. The structural
transformation in Indian states is also evident from the table. It can be seen that the
average Gross Value Added (GVA) share of Agriculture and allied sector has fallen
from, 34.28% in 1994 to 22.33 per cent in 2005 and further to 17% in 2012. On the
other hand GVA share of services sector has increased from 37.94% in 1994 to 47%
in 2005 and further to 52.33% in 2012. The share of the industry sector is found to
increase nominally between 1994 and 2005 and decreased between 2005 and 2012.
Evidence on infrastructural development across Indian states can also be
observed from the table. Average percentage of households with electricity con-
nection increased from 51.89 in 1994 to 66.89 in 2005 and further to 82.33 in 2012.
Similarly, road connectivity is also found to increase between 2005 and 2012.2
Outcome of trade liberalization in Indian states is seen from the table, as the exports
as a percentage of GSDP, on average, has increased from 9.34 to 11.41 between
2005 and 2012.3
3 Empirical Analysis
This section discusses relationship between consumption inequality and different

macroeconomic variables in Indian states during 1993, 2005 and 2011. Figure 2
shows the relationship between level of economic prosperity of Indian states
(measured in terms of real per capita GSDP) and inequality. A positive relationship
is found to be existent. It can be seen that the relationship has become stronger
between 1994 and 2005. The relationship is observed to be stronger in certain states
over others: a club of some 10 states have emerged in 2012 for which the relationship
is way different from a cluster of some others. It can be thus inferred that, at the initial
stage following globalization of the economy, there is no evident relationship
between consumption inequality and per capita GDP. However, the relationship
became stronger with income inequality increasing as the growth across states
matured at the later stage creating a gap between states with inequality increasing
some states over others with higher GDP. This evidence however does tally with that
of Kuznet’s inverted-U shape hypothesis, which says that at the initial stage of
economic development, inequality increases while at the advanced stage it decrea-
ses. The idea behind this inverted-U shape relationship between economic prosperity
and inequality can be further explained through the relationship between structural
transformation and inequality that follows from Kuznets (1955, 1963).
By structural transformation, one recognizes long-term and persistent shifts in
the sectoral composition of economic systems (Chenery et al. 1986; Syrquin 2007;
UNIDO 2009). In the process of structural transformation, a gradual shift of
resources is observed from traditional to more-advanced sectors. A rise in the
relative share of the industry sector is seen to take place, followed by a rise in the
relative share of the services sector. Rising productivity and growth and hence,
globalization and structural transformation across developed and developing
economies are found to have increased wage gap between skilled and unskilled
labour (ILO 2014). Globalization and structural transformation in developing
2
Data are not available for 1994.
3
Data are not available for 1994.
0.45
0.4
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000
Real GSDP Per Capita (at 2005 price)
1994 2005 2012 Trend (1994) Trend (2005) Trend (2012)
Fig. 2 Relationship between per capita income and inequality
economies helped them to reduce the productivity gap with the developed econo-
mies, which in turn have generated large demand for skilled labour and thus results
in higher inequality by intensifying the wage gap with the unskilled labour (Zhu
and Trefler 2005).
As the traditional sectors such as agriculture and mining contracts, and the modern
sectors such as manufacturing and services with more sophisticated skill- and
technology-intensive activities expands, a shift in labor demand is also witnessed.
With the expansion of the skill- and technology-intensive sectors, the relative
demand for high-skilled labor increases and, at the same time, low-skilled workers
are seen to be replaced more and more by “automatization” (Henze 2014). During
this transition, the wage gap is seen to increase between high-skilled and low-skilled
workers (see Blum 2008; OECD 2008, 2011, among others) and this wage gap is the
key link between structural transformation and income inequality (ECLAC 2012).
Although there are a number of studies which have shown the relationship
between the structural transformation and wage inequality, there is hardly any study
to show the relationship between inequalities in general and structural transfor-
mation. Roy and Sinha Roy (2018) find a positive association between income
inequality and structural transformation in a cross-country analysis. In the present
study, an attempt has been made to check the relationship between structural
transformation and inequality at the sub-national level. Part A of Fig. 3, shows the
relationship between GVA share of agriculture and allied activities and inequality.
It can be seen that a negative relationship between the two is found to exist.
However, the relationship becomes stronger with time, as it can be observed from
the figure that in 1994 the trend line was flatter and with time it became steeper. The
corresponding relationship between GVA share of industry sector and inequality
can be seen from the Part B of Fig. 3. Interestingly, even though the trend lines
show a positive relationship between the two is observed in 1994 and 2005, the
0.4 Part A
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
GVA Share of Agriculture & Allied Sector
0.4 Part B
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
GVA Share of Industry Sector
0.4 Part C
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
GVA Share of Service Sector
Fig. 3 Structural change and inequality

relationship has reversed in 2012. However, the scatter diagram shows the absence
of any relationship between the share of manufacturing and inequality across states.
On the other hand, the relationship between GVA share of services sector and
inequality, as shown in Part C of Fig. 3, shows a positive relation which persisted
over time. This graphical analysis clearly shows the positive relationship between
structural transformation and inequality in Indian states. The positive relationship
seems to have intensified over time with both with both transformation towards
manufacturing and services aiding increases in inequality in 2012. These results are
similar to that of Roy and Sinha Roy (2018).
In literature, trade liberalization has been identified as an essential factor
influencing income inequality. Anderson (2005) identifies some channels through
which increased trade openness could affect income inequality. According to the
Heckscher-Ohlin theory, if an economy open ups to trade, redistribution takes place
in favour of relatively abundant factors and as the poorer section of the society
mostly owns these factors they certainly gain from it. Anderson (2005) proposes
that economies engaged in trade may be more eager to use re-distributional policies
since some groups may suffer an income loss. However, Spilimbergo et al. (1999)
suggest the opposite, that economies engaged in trade are likely to have liberal
governments who are also likely not to redistribute income in their economy. Thus,
if the benefits of trade are not distributed evenly in course of economic develop-
ment, more trade would necessarily exacerbate inequality. Some studies find that
trade openness significantly reduces income inequality (White and Anderson 2001;
Dollar and Kray 2002; Edwards 1997; Higgins and Williamson 1999). On the
contrary, some other studies find increase in trade openness increases inequality
(Lundberg and Squire 2003). This study examines the relationship between trade
liberalization and inequality considering Gini coefficient and export to GSDP ratio
of Indian States.4 From Fig. 4 it can be seen that a positive relationship is found to
exist between the two, thus confirming the results of Spilimbergo et al. (1999),
Barro (2000) and Lundberg and Squire (2003).
Post globalisation, when trade liberalization leads the economies to face more
global competition, provision of infrastructure helps these economies to become
more competitive and derive benefits from globalisation. Infrastructure develop-
ment may have a positive effect on the income and welfare of the poor over its
impact on average income (Lopez 2003). On the other hand, infrastructure devel-
opment by allowing poor to access additional productive opportunities and access
to markets helps poorer individuals and underdeveloped areas to get connected to
core economic activities (Estache 2003). Reduction of production and transaction
costs is possible by developing infrastructure in poorer regions (Gannon and Liu
1997). Thus infrastructure development is necessary to reduce income inequality,
when it results in improved access and/or enhanced quality especially for
low-income households (Estache et al. 2000). However, Bajar and Rajeev (2015), a
study on seventeen major Indian states, taking different infrastructural indicators
4
Here trade openness cannot be used as import data at the state level are not available.
0.4
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Export as a percentage of GSDP
2005 2012 Trend (2005) Trend (2012)
Fig. 4 Trade liberalization and inequality
find a positive relationship between infrastructure and inequality and thus contradict
the existing literature.
The present study also seeks to understand the relationship between physical
infrastructural development and inequality in Indian states. The relationship is
shown in Figs. 5 and 6. Figure 5 shows relationship between consumption
inequality and household electrification. It can be seen that a positive relationship
between the two is found to be present. The relationship is found to be stronger with
time, as the trend line becomes steeper from 1994 to 2005 and further to 2012. To
check the robustness of the results, road connectivity is chosen instead of household
0.4
0.35
Gini Coefficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Household Electrification (%)
Fig. 5 Physical infrastructure (household electrification) and inequality

0.4
0.35
Gini Coeficient
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Road Connectivity (KM '000 Square KM)
2005 2012 Trend (2005) Trend (2012)
Fig. 6 Physical infrastructure (road connectivity) and inequality
electrification (see Fig. 6). Even in this case the same results are found to be
present. These observations are in tune with the results of Bajar and Rajeev (2015).
These observations require caution in the course of their interpretation. These
results are however not confirmatory results, but are only indicative. We observe
that there are outliers in the cross-plots, which are perhaps driving the results.
Further, such counterintuitive observations are perhaps indicating that certain states
have not benefitted to the extent other states have from infrastructure development.
4 Conclusions
The main objective of this study was to examine the plausible causes of rising
inequality in India at the sub-national level and thus to arrive at policy implications
in order to achieve targets under SDG 10. Studies that have examined nature and
causes of inequality at the sub-national level are rare. Study of inequality at the
sub-national level expounds intra-country inequality at a more detailed or disag-
gregated level. In a country like India, with diversity, examining inequality at the
more disaggregated level and understanding its causes is essential for the purpose of
sound, but nuanced, policy making across states. This study is an endeavor in that
direction.
Since 1991, the growth rates in states’ output have increased especially after
1993 than in the earlier decades. Economic growth thus seems to have increased
income inequality. As rising income inequality tends to slow the process of poverty
reduction in Indian states, this has been a cause for economists and policy makers.
However, thus far only a few studies have attempted to analyze the causes of rising
inequalities in Indian states. The study comes up with many interesting results. It
shows that structural transformation causes high inequality in Indian states. While
trade liberalization is found to have exacerbated state-level inequality, infrastructure
development has not led trade and structural transformation towards services to be
more inclusive. These indicative findings have important policy implications
requiring carefully designed policies for inequality reduction across Indian states,
which is envisaged in SDG 10. The findings also call for differential approaches to
policy for inequality reduction across Indian states.
References
Ali, I., & Son, H. H. (2007). Measuring inclusive growth. Asian Development Review, 24(1), 11.
Anderson, E. (2005). Openness and inequality in developing countries: A review of theory and
recent evidence. World Development, 33(7), 1045–1063.
Bajar, S., & Rajeev, M. (2015). The impact of infrastructure provisioning on inequality: Evidence
from India; Global Labour University Working Paper No. 35.
Barro, R. J. (2000). Inequality and growth in a panel of countries. Journal of Economic Growth, 5
(1), 5–32.
Berg, A., & Ostry, J. D. (2011). Inequality and unsustainable growth: Two sides of the same coin?
IMF Staff Discussion Note 11/08.
Berg, A., Ostry, J. D., & Zettelmeyer, J. (2012). What makes growth sustained? Journal of
Development Economics, 98(2), 149–166.
Blum, B. (2008). Trade, technology and the rise of the service sector: The effects on US wage
inequality. Journal of International Economics, 4(2), 441–458.
Cannari, L., & D’Alessio, G. (2003). La Distribuzione del Reddito e Della Ricchezza Nelle
Regioni Italiane, Temi di Studio dellaBancad’Italia, 482, Bancad’Italia, Roma.
Chandrasekhar, C. P., & Ghosh, J. (2015). Growth, industrialisation and inequality in India.
Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 20(1), 42–56.
Chenery, H., Robinson, S., & Syrquin, M. (1986). Industrialization and growth: A comparative
study. New York, NY: Oxford University Press (published for The World Bank).
Deaton, A., & Dreze, J. (2002). Poverty and inequality in India: A re-examination. Economic and
Political Weekly, 7, 3729–3748.
Dollar, D., & Kraay, A. (2002). Growth is good for the poor. Journal of Economic Growth, 7(3),
195–225.
ECLAC. (2012). Structural change for equality: An integrated approach to development.
Thirty-fourth Session of ECLAC. San Salvador: United Nations Economic Commission for
Latin America and the Caribbean.
Edwards, S. (1997). Trade policy, growth and income distribution. The American Economic
Review, 87(2), 205–210.
Easterly, W. (2007). Inequality does cause underdevelopment: Insights from a new instrument.
Journal of Development Economics, 84(2), 755–776.
Estache, A., Gomez-Lobo, A., & Leipziger, D. (2000). Utility privatization and the needs of the
poor in Latin America. The World Bank, Mimeo.
Estache, A. (2003). On Latin America’s infrastructure privatization and its distributional effects.
Washington, DC: The World Bank, Mimeo.
Fallah, B., & Partridge, M. D. (2006). The Elusive inequality-economic growth relationship: Are
there differences between cities and the countryside? The Annals of Regional Science, 41(2),
375–400.
Frank, M. W. (2008). Inequality and growth in the United States: Evidence from a new state-level
panel of income inequality measures, economic inquiry.
Galbraith, J., & Garcilazo, E. (2005). Pay inequality in Europe 1995–2000: convergence between
countries and stability inside. European Journal of Comparative Economics, 2(2), 139–175.
Galor, O., & Zeira, J. (1993). Income distribution and macroeconomics. Review of Economic
Studies, 60(1), 33–52.
Gannon, C., & Liu, Z. (1997). Poverty and transport. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Goerlich, F. J., & Mas, M. (2001). Inequality in Spain 1973–91: Contribution to a regional
database. Review of Income and Wealth, 47(3), 361–378.
Henze, P. (2014). Structural change and wage inequality: Evidence from German micro data.
Centre for European Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Paper 204.
Gottingen, Germany: Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultat, Georg-August-Universitat
Gottingen.
Higgins, M., & Williamson, J. G. (1999). Explaining inequality the world round: Cohort size,
Kuznets curves, and openness. NBER Working Paper 7224. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau
of Economic Research.
ILO. (2014). Supplement to the ILO’s global wage report 2014–15. Wages in Asia and the Pacific:
Dynamic but Uneven Progress. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Organization.
Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review, 45, 1–
28.
Kuznets, S. (1963). Quantitative aspects of the economic growth of nations: VIII. Distribution of
income by size. Economic development and Cultural Change, XI(part II), 1–80.
Lopez, H. (2003). Macroeconomics and inequality. The World Bank research workshop—
macroeconomic challenges in low income countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Lundberg, M., & Squire, L. (2003). The simultaneous evolution of growth and inequality. The
Economic Journal, 113(487), 326–375.
Monastiriotis, V. (2000). Inter- and Intra-regional wage inequalities in the UK: An examination of
the sources of UK Wage inequalities and their evolution, ERSA Conference Papers.
OECD. (2008). Growing unequal? Income distribution and poverty in OECD countries. Paris:
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
OECD. (2011). Divided we stand: Why inequality keeps rising. Paris: Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development.
Panizza, U. (2002). Income inequality and economic growth: Evidence from American data.
Journal of Economic Growth, 7(1), 25–41.
Partridge, M. D. (1997). Is inequality harmful for growth? Comment, American Economic Review,
87(5), 1019–1031.
Partridge, M. D. (2005). Does income distribution affect US State economic growth? Journal of
Regional Science, 45(2), 363–394.
Partridge, M. D. (2006). The relationship between inequality and labor market performance:
Evidence from U.S. States. Journal of Labour Research, 27(1), 1–20.
Perugini, C., & Martino, G. (2008). Income inequality within European regions: Determinants and
effects on growth. Review of Income and Wealth, 54(3), 373–406.
Roy, R. P., & Sinha Roy, S. (2017). Does inequality Dampen economic growth? A cross-country
analysis. In C. Roy (Ed.), International trade and inclusive development: Emerging issues and
enlarging debates (pp. 48–58). New Delhi: New Academic Publishers.
Roy, R. P., & Sinha Roy, S. (2018). Structural change, trade and inequality: Cross country
evidence in Kuznets beyond Kuznets: Structural transformation and income inequality in the
Era of globalization in Asia, edited by Paul, S. Asian Development Bank Institute, Chapter-7,
pp. 93–131.
Sen, A. (2001). Estimates of consumer expenditure and implications for comparable poverty
estimates after the NSS 55th Round. Paper presented at NSSO International Seminar on
‘Understanding Socio-economic Changes through National Surveys’, 12–13 May, New Delhi.
Reprinted in Angus Deaton and Valerie Kozel (Eds.). Data and Dogma: The Great Indian
Poverty Debate. Macmillan, New Delhi (2005), pp. 203–238.
Sen, A., & Himanshu. (2005). Poverty and inequality in India: Getting closer to the truth.
Available at www.networkideas.org. Reprinted in Angus Deaton and Valerie Kozel (eds). Data
and Dogma: The Great Indian Poverty Debate. Macmillan, New Delhi (2005), pp. 306–370.
Spilimbergo, A., Londono, J. L., & Szekely, M. (1999). Income distribution, factor endowments,
and trade openness. Journal of Development Economics, 59(1), 77–101.
Sundaram, K., & Tendulkar, S. D. (2003a). Poverty has declined in the 1990s: A resolution of
comparability problems in NSS consumer expenditure data. Economic and Political Weekly,
25–31, 327–337.
Sundaram, K., & Tendulkar, S. D. (2003b). Poverty in India in the 1990s: An analysis of changes
in 15 major states. Economic and Political Weekly, 5–11, 1385–1393.
Syrquin, M. (2007). Kuznets and Pasinetti on the study of structural transformation: Never the
Twain shall meet? ICER Working Paper 46. Boston, MA: Institute for Clinical and Economic
Review.
Topel, R. H. (1994). Regional labor markets and the determinants of wage inequality. American
Economic Review, 84(2), 17–22.
UNIDO. (2009). Industrial development report. Vienna: United Nations Industrial Development
Organization.
Vanneman, R., & Dubey, A. (2011) Horizontal and vertical inequalities in India. India Human
development Survey Working paper No. 16.
White, H., & Anderson, E. (2001). Growth versus distribution: Does the pattern of growth matter?
Development Policy Review, 19(3), 267–289.
Wu, X., Perloff, J. M., & Golan, A. (2006). Effects of government policies on urban and rural
income inequality. The Review of Income and Wealth, 52(2), 213–235.
Zhang, M., Zhou, G., & Fan. G. (2019). Political control and economic inequality: Evidence from
Chinese cities. China Economic Review. January. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2019.01.011.
Zhu, S. C., & Trefler, D. (2005). Trade and inequality in developing countries: A general
equilibrium analysis. Journal of International Economics, 65(1), 21–48.
Chapter 8
Ensure Quality Education for All
in India: Prerequisite for Achieving
SDG 4
Beena Pandey
Abstract As a signatory of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), India too has

committed to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all children by
2030. Initiatives such as Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and Right to Education
(RTE) have given the desired impetus to education system in India. Though sig-
nificant progress has been made in universalising elementary education through
improvements in enrolment rates, retention and other physical infrastructure across
the country but much remains to be done in qualitative terms and learning outcomes
as against quantitative terms. The broad focus of the chapter is on the current
approaches adopted by India to contextualise Goal 4 pertaining to education of the
SDGs in the Indian context by integrating them into the policy initiatives, formu-
lation of New Education Policy and its positive impact on achieving quality edu-
cation, as SDG 4 emphasises. The second section examines the trends in education
attainments at primary, secondary and tertiary levels in India. The third section
explores some major challenges like dropouts, social infrastructure and accessibility
issues in education sector. The last section summarises how India has planned to
move forward to achieve SDG 4 by 2030.
Keywords Quality Education Access to Education Equity and Inclusive

Education
This is the revised and updated version of my earlier paper ‘Achieving SDG 4 in India: Moving
from Quantity to Quality Education for All’, August 2018.
B. Pandey (&)
(RIS), Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, India
e-mail: beenapandey@ris.org.in

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_8
166 B. Pandey
Creativity is the key to success in the future and primary education is where
teachers can bring creativity in children at that level.
Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam
Former President of India
1 Introduction
In pursuance to ‘Transforming India’ the Government of India has initiated many

policy initiatives in transforming education sector with the motto of ‘Education for
All, Quality Education’ (www.pibmumbai.gov.in). To achieve the goal of
Education for All in India, very distinctive policy initiatives for providing free and
compulsory education to all children has been initiated which resulted into the
improved enrolment rates across the country in schools. India has achieved sig-
nificant progress towards the goal of Education for All (MHRD 2017). Initiatives
such as Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and Right to Education (RTE) have given
much-required thrust to education system in India. Though it has significantly
improved the enrolment rates across the country in primary education, but the
challenge of quality in terms of learning outcomes remains to be addressed
(GoI, Economic Survey 2016–17).
1.1 Transition from MDGs to SDGs
Most of the goals of MDGs which were conceptualised in 2000 as a set of eight
global goals on diverse dimensions of development were aimed at building a global
partnership for development are very much inherent in the newly adopted
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 which are an inter-governmentally
agreed set of seventeen goals and 169 targets relating to sustainable development
issues. All the SDGs seem to be more comprehensive and ambitious with focus on
its relevance to all the people of the world to ensure that ‘no one is left behind’
(Pandey 2016).
These SDGs aim to end poverty, zero hunger, and improve education and health
standards, gender equality, clean drinking water, sanitation and energy, and to
combat climate change within stipulated time period. Of all the SDGs, education is
the most vital component for sustainable development as all the SDGs are
inter-dependent.
On issues pertaining to education, SDG 4 emphasises on inclusive and equitable
quality education for all is clearly viewed as the key to social progress in all the
countries. Mainly all the targets of SDG 4 specifically focus on gender equality at
8 Ensure Quality Education for All in India: Prerequisite … 167
all levels of education, learning outcomes, technical and vocational education of

youth and adult literacy (Target 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3) (RIS and UN 2016). It also deals
with the inclusion of vulnerable groups and their equal access to all levels of
education and vocational training (Target 4.5). Target 4.7 deals with the knowledge
and skills needed to promote sustainable development. Further, Target 4.a to Target
4.c stresses on the importance of physical infrastructure of the schools dealing with
the gender sensitivity, for disabled and children in vulnerable situations. Expansion
of scholarships in developing countries and supply of qualified teachers for
achievement of effective learning outcomes are some other dimensions which SDG
4 touched upon.
As a signatory to the SDGs, India too has committed to ensuring inclusive and
quality education to all children by 2030. Though significant progress has been
made in universalising primary education through improvement in enrolment rates,
retention rates and expansion of physical infrastructure, but much remains to be
done in qualitative terms.
In view of the above facts, the chapter apart from Introduction in the first section,
the second section presents an overview of the SDG 4 pertaining to quality edu-
cation. It would also analyse the current approaches adopted by the Government of
India to contextualise SDG 4 on education policy initiatives. The third section
examines the trends in enrolment rates at all levels in school education in India. The
fourth section explores some major challenges like dropouts, social infrastructure
and accessibility issues in education sector. The last section summarises how India
has planned to move forward to achieve SDG 4 by 2030.
2 Overview
2.1 Focus of SDG Goal 4—Ensure Quality, Access,

Equity and Inclusion (QAEI)
All the goals identified in the Agenda 2030 related to eradication of poverty, zero
hunger, health, education and clean energy and other developmental issues have
been key to India’s economic development planning since 1960. Given the
inter-dependence of SDGs, Goal 4 needs to be implemented in an integrated
manner, with its emphasis on quality, access, equity and inclusion at all levels of
formal education. Though specific targets covered under the goal 4 are early
childhood development and care, pre-primary education, quality primary and sec-
ondary education, learning outcomes, gender equality and vocational skills rather
than mere quantum of school enrolment rates, attendance, rote learning or syllabus
completion. In fact, inclusion and quality education are the prerequisites to achieve
sustainable development goal 4.
For India to achieve targets of SDG 4 within a fifteen-year time frame, QAEI
offer a window of opportunity to be the prerequisites for quality and accessibility of
education for India’s young population to achieve at least a proficiency level in
168 B. Pandey
reading and effective learning outcomes. However, series of flagship programmes

and policies initiated by India, focussing on quality and inclusiveness are already in
place prior to the adoption of SDGs. An initiative like the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education (RTE) provides for inclusive elementary education for
all and reserved 25% quotas in private schools for children from economically
weaker and disadvantaged sections of the society. Education for inclusion specif-
ically intended to give equal opportunities for all sections of society that includes
gender, SC/ST, minorities, migrants, out of school children and children with
special needs, require strong government intervention as many states and Union
Territories have not executed this provision of RTE and many breached the terms
and conditions (NEUPA 2014; Kumar and Others 2018).
2.2 Major Policies and Interventions for Education

and Learning
Since 1951, with the inception of First Five Year Plans and later in subsequent
National Plans due emphasis has been given to the development and expansion of
education. Mid-Day Meal Scheme (MDMS) is one of the flagship programmes of
the Government to enhance enrolment, retention and thereby intend to improve the
required nutritional levels among school-going children. The scheme was launched
in 1995 under which hot cooked nutritious meals are provided to every child
studying in classes I to VIII every day except holidays. India has world’s largest
MDMS, at present serving nutritious food to 10-crore students in 11.5 lakh schools.
Involvement of mothers in MDM has also led to significant improvement in
cooking and hygiene along with the decline in teachers’ absenteeism. Similarly, the
Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) programme, “Education for All Movement” as a part
of the constitutional right to free and compulsory education for 6–14 years old has
been adopted to ensure that no child in this age group remain out of school, and are
enrolled in age-appropriate grades. Also, substantial amount of funds have been
invested by SSA for recruitment of additional teachers in Government schools for
improving the teacher availability.
Though India has made substantial progress in quantum expansion and equity in
enrolments across level of education, there is enough scope to strengthen quality
parameters. Together, it became all the more clear that absolute access in completing
four grades of primary education has not been sufficient for positive learning out-
comes. Thus, it is crucial to ensure that quality education, equity and inclusion in
education system represent key elements of the vision for SDG 4 and measuring
progress to 2030. (sustainabledevelopment.un.org). Given the fact that quality is
difficult to define, measure and monitor, education needs to be inclusive in all
dimensions of children’s’ holistic development which includes skills, knowledge,
values and attitudes, besides access to health and nutrition. However, evidences have
shown that adequate investments in quality-related inputs like infrastructure, text-

books and teacher training lead to better outcomes.
At present, India is facing major challenge of imparting quality education to
children at school level; therefore efforts are on way to reorient SSA towards
achieving quality education. In accordance with SDG 4 for quality education,
recently, India has launched a very innovative scheme called Samagra Shiksha to
ensure inclusive and equitable quality education extending from pre-school to
senior secondary level by incorporating three schemes Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan,
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) and Teacher Education. Apart
from this, Department of School Education and NITI Aayog, in consultation with
all the States and Union Territories have been jointly developing a School
Education Quality Index (SEQI) to improve education outcomes (learning, access,
equity) also.
3 Trends in Education: Inter-sectoral Linkages
In India, progress in education has been widespread in terms of massive enrolment,

gradual expansion of school infrastructure, the narrowing of gender gaps in literacy
and the overall literacy rate. Indeed, empowering women and girls with education is
fundamental to build a sustainable future. There is a widely accepted view that
various indirect returns of girls’ education are closely linked with the improvement
in health and educational status of women which can be seen in terms of reduced
fertility, lower population growth, reduced maternal mortality rate, reduced child
mortality, reduced school drop-out rates and improved nutrition show significant
correlation with improvement in educational and health status of women as dis-
cussed in the next section.
3.1 Tracking Progress
India’s constructive efforts in providing primary education have made significant

progress in access to schooling, still around 61 lakhs children were out of school
during 2014–15. With a shocking 4.17% dropout rate at the elementary level in
2014–15 forced us to explore the causes that are keeping children out of school.
The gross enrolment rate (GER) in primary education though declined from
118.62% in 2010–11 to 111.89 in 2014–15 whereas upper primary education GER
increased from 81.15% to 101.04 during the same period. School dropout rates
have declined from 6.5% in 2010–11 to 4.17% in 2014–15 (Table 1).
According to 2011 census, the overall literacy rate increased to 70.5% in 2014
from 61% in 2001 (Table 2). The literacy rates for the male has grown by 6.4%
points, registering an increase from 73.4% in 2001 to 79.8% in 2014 as compared to
increase of 13.0% points for female literacy rates which rose from 47.8% in 2001 to
170 B. Pandey
Table 1 School education: elementary

Parameter 2010–11 2014–15
Enrolment (crores) 19.3 19.77 (Girls: 9.56 crore, i.e. 48.34%)
Number of schools (lakhs) 13.62 14.45
Dropout rate (%) 6.5 4.17
Out of School Children (OoSC) (lakhs) 134 61
GERa (Primary) 118.62 111.89
(Upper Primary) 81.15 101.04
GER: elementary (General) 103.9 96.89 (Girls: 99.24)
Elementary (SC) 116.7 108.0 (Girls: 110.45)
Elementary (ST) 101.5 104.03 (Girls: 103.65)
a
Higher GER percentages (above 100) indicate enrolment of under-age and over-age children in
the 6–14 age groups. Hence, reduction in GER indicateage-appropriatete enrolment, elimination of
duplicate/double enrolments, admission in unrecognised private schools
Source Niti Aayog, HRD Division, 2016, Access, Equity and Inter-sectoral Linkages in
Education (Tiwari 2016)
Table 2 India: adult literacy rate (%)

(Age 15 years and above)
Total Male Female Gender gap
2001 61 73.4 47.8 25.6
2011 69.3 78.8 59.3 19.6
2014 70.5 79.8 60.8 19
Source GOI, MHRD, Educational Statistics at a Glance, 2016/18
60.8% in 2014. India has shown massive improvement in closing the gender gap
from 25.6 to 19.0 during the same period. In the context of SDG 4, already National
Policy on Education 1986 and its revised Programme of Action, 1992 envisages to
play an interventionist role in the empowerment of women. Inherently, the policy
aimed to eradicate women’s illiteracy and related impediments inhibiting their
access to education (NPE, 1986). However, the issue of quality, access, equity and
inclusion in education remains critical as number of out of school children (OoSC)
is 61 lakhs. Further large disparities in literacy rates between male and females in
rural and urban areas has already been taken care by the policy makers along the
lines of SDG 4.
Yet, there are several states in India where the literacy rate is below the national
average (72.99), viz. Uttar Pradesh (69.72), Andhra Pradesh (67.66), Jharkhand
(67.63), Rajasthan (67.06), Arunachal Pradesh (66.95) and Bihar (63.82). According
to Annual Survey of Education Report (ASER 2016) only 47.8% of class V children
were able to read Class II level fluently and 25.9% of class V children were able to do
division sums. In this regard, Bihar and Jharkhand showed very disappointing
reading levels in the past couple of years. On the brighter side, Kerala, Lakshadweep
and Mizoram were the three states reported with literacy rate greater than 90%.
It is appropriate to mention that Government has already adopted various

measures to achieve adult literacy and skill development under the scheme
Saakshar Bharat—Adult Education Skill Development of the Adult Education
Bureau, till March 2016, around 5.13 crore (3.65 crore females and 1.48 crore
males) persons declared literate after clearing the biannual assessment tests.
Apart from this, since the First Five Year Plan, series of initiatives have been
launched to promote the adult education programmes also. Further from 1988
onwards through National Literacy Mission functional literacy has been imparted to
adult illiterates between the age group of 15–35 years of youth.
Under the convergence scheme, the National Literacy Mission Authority
(NLMA) has taken up various linkages relating to empowerment issues like
electoral/financial and legal literacy and also taken proactive initiative for alignment
of Saakshar Bharat with Sansaad Adarsh Gram Yojana in achieving 100% literacy.
The authority also motivated and mobilised more than one crore Saakshar Bharat
beneficiaries to open their bank accounts under Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana
(PMJDY) (www.pibmumbai.gov.in/scripts/detail.asp?release/d=E2016PR2703).
On the other hand in 2015, the Rashtriya Avishkar Abhiyan (RAA) was launched
to strengthen learning of maths and science in upper primary classes to motivate
and encourage children of the age group 6–18 years. This initiative aimed to bring
significant systemic improvements in the school system and encourage students to
learn science and mathematics through alternative strategies. In some states, higher
education institutions like IITs, IISER’s and NIT’s, have adopted several schools
for mentoring, under this programme, even the students are exposed to field visits to
factories and research hubs for practical knowledge and understanding. In schools,
through science and mathematics clubs, students participate in competitions and
exhibitions to showcase their innovations in subjects like science, maths and
technology.
Despite the Kothari Commission (1966) recommendations that total government
spending on education be raised to 6% of GNP by 1986 which was also endorsed
by both original and modified version of New Education Policy, until now, as
evident from Table 3, since 2009–10, the expenditure on education as percentage of
GDP has been hovering around 3% as against 1.4% for health only. During the past
decade, in the year 2013–14, the public expenditure on education as a percentage of
GDP was highest at 3.1% as compared to 2.7% in 2017–18 (BE). However, the
total expenditure on social services like health, education and others by both the
Centre and States as a proportion of GDP has remained in the range of 6% during
2012–13 to 2014–15 which declined to 5.8% in 2015–16 and again increased up to
6.6% in 2017–18 (BE). According to the MHRD data, about 68% of the total
education budget goes towards school education and remaining 32% goes towards
university and higher education, technical and adult education. A report by TARA
supported by UNDP, 2015 revealed that for primary and secondary schooling in
India, there are no financial constraints due to financial provisions in the RTE Act,
however, there are considerable financial gaps for achieving early childhood care,
vocational and tertiary education. Further, the report also estimated that in India out
of 35 lakh crores, a gap of 27 lakh crores required for early childhood development,
172 B. Pandey
Table 3 Trends in social sector expenditure

Items 2009–10 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
(RE) (BE)
As percentage to GDP
Total 28.6 27.1 26.7 26.4 24.7 26.7 26.4
expenditure
Expenditure 6.9 6.6 6.6 6.2 5.8 6.5 6.6
on social
services
of which
Education 3 3.1 3.1 2.8 2.4 2.6 2.7
Health 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.5 1.4
Others 2.5 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.6
Source GOI, Economic Survey 2016–17, 2017–18 (Volume 2)
care, and pre-primary education and 19 lakh crores for quality, technical, vocational
and tertiary education.
In spite of higher share in the total education budget to school education, India is
yet to universalise elementary education. The enrolment for the age group 6–
14 years has improved from 81.6% in 2000–01 to 96.9 in 2014–15. As the
Government spending on secondary education remains substantially low, state of
affairs in secondary and higher education is not at all satisfactory. Despite, Ministry
of Human Resource Development (MHRD) launched a centrally sponsored
Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan (RMSA) to increase access to and improve
quality of secondary education; still the gross enrolment rates (GER) in secondary
education was 76% and 52% in senior secondary education during 2013–14
(Table 4).
The GER in primary education has reached to 100% in 2014–15. The GER for
all children in elementary education increased from 81.6% in 2000–01 to 96.9%
(provisional figure) in 2014–15. The relatively lower level of GERs in upper pri-
mary, secondary education and senior secondary education continue to be a matter
of grave concern. Between 2004–05 and 2014–15, the GER in secondary education
increased from 51.7 to 78.5% while the GER in senior secondary education
increased from 27.8 to 54.2%, way below the target of providing universal access to
education and reaching 100% enrolment. However, at this juncture, universalisation
of secondary education can be viewed as a priority and a stepping stone in an effort
to enable young people for higher education to acquire required skills to enter into
the labour market.
There are huge instances of school dropouts at secondary level especially from
low-income families because of their apprehension of not getting suitable jobs
because of the non-employability factor of the Indian education system. Again at
this juncture, introduction of vocational studies and skill development programmes
at the higher secondary level would be a possible solution to curtail dropout rates
and a major boost for employment for the skilled youth. In this context,
Vocationalisation of School Education under Samagra Shiksha aims to integrate
vocational education along with academic curriculum at the secondary level to train
Table 4 Gross enrolment ratio (GER) (all categories of students)
Year Primary (I–V) 6–10 years Upper primary (VI–VIII) 11– Elementary (I–VIII) 6–13 years
13 years
Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
2000–01 104.9 85.9 95.7 66.7 49.9 58.6 90.3 72.4 81.6
2005–06 112.8 105.8 109.4 75.2 66.4 71 98.5 91 94.9
2006–07 114.6 108 111.4 77.6 69.6 73.8 100.4 93.5 97.1
2007–08 115.3 112.6 114 81.5 74.4 78.1 102.4 98 100.3
2008–09 114.7 114 114.3 82.7 76.6 79.8 102.5 99.6 101.1
2009–10 113.8 113.8 113.8 84.3 79 81.7 102.5 100.4 101.5
2010–11 114.9 116.3 115.5 87.5 82.9 85.2 104.5 103.3 103.9
2011–12 105.8 107.1 106.5 82.5 81.4 82 97.2 97.6 97.4
2012–13a 104.8 107.2 106 80.6 84.6 82.5 95.6 98.6 97
2013–14a 100.2 102.6 101.4 86.3 92.8 89.3 95.1 99.1 97
2014–15a 98.9 101.4 100.1 87.7 95.3 91.2 94.8 99.2 96.9
All categories of students
Year Secondary (IX–X) 14– Senior secondary (XI–XII) (IX–XII) 14–17 years Higher education 18–
8 Ensure Quality Education for All in India: Prerequisite …
15 years 16–17 years 23 years

Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
2001–02 NA NA NA NA NA NA 38.2 27.7 33.3 9.3 6.7 8.1
2002–03 NA NA NA NA NA NA 41.3 33.2 37.5 10.3 7.5 9
2003–04 NA NA NA NA NA NA 42.9 34.3 38.9 10.6 7.7 9.2
2004–05 57.4 45.3 51.7 30.8 24.5 27.8 44.3 35.1 39.9 11.6 8.2 10
2005–06 57.6 46.2 52.2 31.4 25.2 28.5 44.6 35.8 40.4 13.5 9.4 11.6
2006–07 58.6 47.4 53.5 31.5 26.1 28.9 45 36.8 41.1 14.5 10 12.4
2007–08 62.6 53.2 58.2 36.3 30.4 33.5 49.4 41.9 45.8 15.2 10.7 13.1
(continued)
173
Table 4 (continued)
174
All categories of students

Year Secondary (IX–X) 14– Senior secondary (XI–XII) (IX–XII) 14–17 years Higher education 18–
15 years 16–17 years 23 years
Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
2008–09 64.8 55.5 60.4 37.5 31.6 34.5 51 43.5 47.4 15.8 11.4 13.7
2009–10 66.7 58.7 62.9 38.5 33.5 36.1 52.5 46.1 49.4 17.1 12.7 15
2010–11 69.2 60.9 65.2 42.3 36.2 39.4 55.7 48.5 52.2 20.8 17.9 19.4
2011–12 69 63.9 66.6 47.6 43.9 45.9 58.8 54.5 56.8 22.1 19.4 20.8
2012–13a 69.6 67 68.1 41.9 39.5 40.8 57 56.5 56.8 22.7 20.1 21.5
a
2013–14 76.8 76.5 76.6 52.8 51.6 52.2 62.5 62.6 62.5 23.9 22 23
2014–15a 78.1 78.9 78.5 54.6 53.8 54.2 64.9 65.8 65.3 25.3 23.2 24.3
Data Source (i) Figure from 2000–01 to 2011–12, MHRD, GOI (website: http://mhrd.gov.on/statist)
(ii) Figure for 2012–13 to 2014–15; NUEPA, New Delhi (website: http://dise.in/)
(iii) Figure from 2001–02 to 2011–12: MHRD, GOI (website: http://mhrd.gov.in/statist)
(iv) Figure for 2012–13 & 2014–15: NUEPA, New Delhi (website: http://dise.in/)
a
Figures related to School Education are provisional
NA Not Available
For Higher Education: MHRD, GOI (website: http://mhrd.gov.in/statist)
B. Pandey
students for the job market. Under this scheme, students of classes IX to XII are
expected to study various components of vocational education, i.e. vocational skills
and employability skills for their bright careers and in some way helps in curtailing
the dropout rates at higher secondary levels.
It has been reported that there is huge dropout among girls at all levels of
education because for every 100 elementary schools (class I to VIII std) in rural
areas only 14 schools are offering secondary education, whereas just six schools
cater to higher secondary education (XI–XII). The National Sample Survey Report
71st round reveals that in India more than 12% of rural households lack secondary
schools within 5 km, whereas in urban areas it is less than 1%. This shows that due
to non-availability of secondary and higher secondary schools, young girls have to
travel far off places that flare up the security, safety and distance issues.
In order to overcome these issues, at elementary level the Government has
adopted National Programme for Education of Girls at Elementary Level
(NPEGEL) under the SSA to promote gender equity. Further, owing to the setting
up of residential schools for girls at the elementary level under the Kasturba Gandhi
Balika Vidyalaya (KGBV) by Government where females’ literacy is low have seen
growth in the female GER in both elementary and secondary schools. Various
initiatives like national incentives to girls under RMSA, envisages secondary
schools for girls within a reasonable distance of their habitation and to strengthen
quality of education by making all secondary schools conformed to prescribed
norms like gender equality, ICT, vocational education, girls hostels and
socio-economic and disability barriers etc. are paving the way for gender equity in
school education (www.rmsaindia.gov.in). In this way there are immense possi-
bilities for India to achieve Target 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of SDG 4 which calls for gender
equity in elementary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
Non-availability of female teachers also plays a critical role for drop-out female
students. It has been estimated that annually around 63% female teachers are opting
for teaching in schools, there are number of female teachers per hundred male
teachers is a little above 100 in primary schools but only 72 female teachers in
secondary schools during 2015–16 (Educational Statistics—At a Glance, 2018).
According to Table 5, data relating to drop-out rates indicate that though declining
from year to year still remains a major challenge. With the increased number of
schools, improved facilities in schools and enrolment, the annual dropout rate at
primary level for all categories of students has lowered down by 1.28% point from
5.62% in 2011–12 to 4.34% in 2013–14. As against this, during the same period, the
annual dropout rate at upper primary and secondary level for all categories has
increased to 3.77% from 2.65% and reached to the highest 17.86% from 14.54 for the
secondary level. Apart from socio-economic issues, infrastructure, lack of qualified
teachers, pupil-teacher ratio, crimes against children like, child labour, child marriage
and child trafficking are the main reasons that cause school dropouts.
There are many reasons for high dropout rates in India, as some studies of ASER
in Rajasthan pointed out that sometimes reluctance of parents and simply lack of
interest in going to school are the major constraints. On the other hand, an
administrative responsibility of schools and election duties for teachers also has had
176
Table 5 Average annual drop-out rate in school education (all categories of students)
Classes/year Primary Upper primary Secondary Senior secondary
Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total Boys Girls Total
2011–12a 5.89 5.34 5.62 2.13 3.2 2.65 NA NA NA NA NA NA
2012–13a 4.68 4.66 4.67 2.3 4.01 3.13 14.54 14.54 14.54 NA NA NA
2013–14a 4.53 4.14 4.34 3.09 4.49 3.77 17.93 17.79 17.86 1.48 1.61 1.54
Source MHRD: Educational Statistics at a Glance, 2016
a
Figure related to School education are provisional
B. Pandey
an adverse impact on teaching inefficiency. Long distances, lack of infrastructural

facilities, care of siblings and elderly, engagements in cattle rearing, poor access to
safe drinking water and sanitation facilities, availability of electricity, availability of
sports equipments and facilities, chairs and desks, digital learning and corporal
punishment are the biggest offender in deteriorating inclusiveness in education
system (Chugh 2009).
For analysing Target 4.a which aims to improve educational infrastructure,
Table 6 presents the performance of schools in different Indian states from 2010 to
2016 with respect to Right to Education indicators. Haryana tops among the
availability of girls useable toilets followed by Gujarat. Likewise, since 2014 Bihar
has done fairly well in terms of availability of drinking water in schools. However,
India has a long way to achieve progress in the number of schools meeting the
infrastructural requirements mandated by RTE.
4 Quality Education: A Major Concern
4.1 Low Learning Outcomes
As emphasised in Target 4.1 of SDG 4, at present an important concern in India has

been often raised in the context of school education, that despite the quantum of high
enrolment and attendance rate, relevant learning outcomes at all levels vary across
widely. If we go beyond the basics, it is not definite that if the young students who
have completed their elementary classes would join secondary education or have
gained any proficiency in foundation learning and arithmetic skills. This has also
been pointed out in several studies including ASER 2014 (GoI, Economic Survey
2016–17) about a quarter of all children enrolled in Std VIII have difficulty in reading
a simple text of the Std II level and close to half still cannot do a simple division
problem (ASER 2014). The report also presented some worrying interrelated trends
that firstly, in 2014 the basic ability of std VIII children seems to be lower than that of
children who were in Std VIII in 2008/09 and secondly if a child did not learn the
basic skills by Std V, chances are very low that that child would pick up these skills
in later years. As a result, despite an increase in the number of years spent in school,
basic capabilities as measured by ability to read and to arithmetic remain stagnant, at
least for some children (ASER 2014). Arithmetic is also a major cause of concern as
only 26% students in Std V can do a division problem.
At the national level, through recent Government initiatives, between 2014 and
2016, the enrolment for all the age groups marginally increased (ASER 2017).
Nationally, the proportion of children in Std III who are able to read at least Std I
level text has gone up from 40.2% in 2014 to 42.5% in 2016. This proportion shows
substantial increase among children in government schools in many states, viz.
Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Telangana.
Similarly, overall reading levels in Std V who could read a Std II level text
Table 6 Trends over time
178
Performance of schools with respect to selected Right to Education indicators by state 2010, 2014 and 2016
State School facilities
% Schools with
Boundary wall Kitchen shed for Drinking water Toilet available and Girls toilet available
cooking mid-day meal available useable and useable
2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016
Andhra 47.2 44.3 49.5 64.2 65.1 70 64.8 61.2 56.6 38.6 64.3 82.9 25.4 54.2 72.8
Pradesh
Arunachal 24.5 44.9 50 64 57.4 56 53.2 53.5 50.7 25.3 35.1 49.3 12.2 24.5 35.8
Pradesh
Assam 19.1 24.3 32.5 80.2 82.7 86.7 60.9 65.3 66.7 33.1 58.7 61.6 13.7 47 54.3
Bihar 48.1 52.4 50.3 64 87.7 87.2 78.7 90.4 89.5 33.6 60.6 70.6 18.1 46.2 60.8
Chhattisgarh 48.8 60.8 62.4 86.1 92.9 94.7 77.6 80.3 85 29.6 68.9 78.1 20 53.4 70.2
Gujarat 84.4 90.9 94.2 88.3 90 91.9 79.4 87 84.6 64.8 84.8 82.9 49.9 81.4 81.1
Haryana 82.7 91.4 91.6 51 75.8 82 74.6 76.2 75.8 67.9 81.8 85.5 52.8 79.6 82.3
Himachal 37.9 66.4 57.4 82.5 97.1 97.5 83.2 87.7 84.7 56 87.6 84 38.7 86.2 79.5
Pradesh
Jharkhand 27 24.7 33 73.5 83.9 88.4 73.8 80.2 81.5 26.8 52.9 62.8 20.9 48 61.4
Karnataka 59.3 73.7 81.2 92.9 93 95.1 75.8 81.2 75.3 38.4 60.2 63.1 31.8 55.1 59.3
Kerala 81.8 77.7 79.3 98.1 98.8 98.1 85.7 83 80.5 58.2 84.8 82 43.9 80.2 78.8
Madhya 37.3 40.2 39.8 89.9 89.8 85.7 78.5 75.3 73 50.3 55.1 58.5 28.9 40.3 45.9
Pradesh
Maharashtra 57.5 66.9 74.4 78.2 92 95.6 69 70.5 67.1 53 66.3 68 43.2 59.1 62.5
Manipur 11.3 9.6 9.5 58.4 52.8 51.5 5.1 15.7 15.3 40.2 53.1 43.8 8.4 19.8 24.5
Meghalaya 14.2 9.7 6.8 60.6 83.3 86.7 23.9 16.5 19.8 24.5 38.8 51.9 14.8 16.8 38.5
Mizoram 37.7 51.1 26.7 96.2 94 93.6 48.5 68.5 64.7 55.6 33.7 40 30.8 28.1 25.3
(continued)
B. Pandey
Table 6 (continued)
Performance of schools with respect to selected Right to Education indicators by state 2010, 2014 and 2016
State School facilities
% Schools with
Boundary wall Kitchen shed for Drinking water Toilet available and Girls toilet available
cooking mid-day meal available useable and useable
2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016 2010 2014 2016
Nagaland 42.8 52.6 40.8 81.7 79.2 84 37 23.4 22.6 53.9 68 50 30.6 45 40.9
Odisha 40.8 48.2 47.4 74.4 82.8 87.8 70.3 81.4 77.7 44.4 63.2 75.5 34.7 53.3 65.8
Punjab 82.8 88.9 91.8 94.7 94.5 97 83.1 81 81.7 61.2 79.2 80.5 49.4 71.6 75.8
Rajasthan 70.1 84.5 82.4 83.8 89.8 90.8 68 73.4 70.1 65.4 81.5 83.2 50.3 73.7 79.8
Tamil Nadu 60.7 71 72.9 96.7 97.5 97.9 80.5 79.8 82.5 44.6 79.8 79.4 35.1 68.7 76.3
Telangana 61.2 58.9 69.6 71 76.1 81.1 64.8 61.2 56.8 38.6 64.3 75 25.4 54.2 64.4
Tripura 19.4 28.2 39.5 88.2 97.1 99.1 40 56.2 59.1 43 58.7 65.8 30.3 57.1 40
Uttar Pradesh 44.4 64.3 66.9 89.3 96 96.5 82.2 85.8 82 47.4 54.9 54.8 33.9 49.1 51.5
Uttarakhand 66.8 56.6 56.4 96.3 97.3 95.6 68.3 69.2 72.3 53.4 69.2 74.8 24 53.7 61.2
West Bengal 34.5 48.7 57.3 86.3 95.4 93.4 67.2 78.4 79.4 52.1 70.8 79 23.7 46.9 64.3
8 Ensure Quality Education for All in India: Prerequisite …
All India 51 58.8 60.4 82.1 88.1 89.7 72.7 75.6 74.1 47.2 65.2 68.7 32.9 55.7 61.9
Source: ASER, 2017 Annual Status of Education Report 2016. (http://img.asercentre.org/docs/Publications/ASER%20Reports/ASER%202016/aser_2016.
pdf)
179
180 B. Pandey
improved by more than 5% points from 2014 to 2016 in Gujarat, Maharashtra,

Tripura, Nagaland and Rajasthan. However, reading levels in Std VIII show a slight
decline since 2014 from 74.7 to 73.1% in 2016.
In 2014, only 25.4% of Std II children could do a 2 digit subtraction, but in 2016
this number has risen to 27.2%. Children’s ability to read English is slightly
improved in Std III but relatively unchanged in Std V. In 2016, 32% children in
Std III could read simple words in English as compared to 28.5% in 2009 (ASER
2017). In this situation, one should imagine the agony faced by young school
students of class VIII who are not able to perform academically according to their
standards or according to their parents and schools expectations. At this juncture,
one should not blame the teachers too, as they are bound to complete the prescribed
syllabus in a limited duration. Sometimes, in doing so, they end up teaching only to
the top bright students of the class, leaving behind the average students. So in this
precarious situation, the fallen behind students are left to the mercy of the educated
or well off parents who can provide additional support to them through private
tutors. On the other hand, students who lack these advantages like well-educated
parents or affluence face dual risk both at home and in school of learning deficits.
Another factor comes in between the no-detention policy till VIII class in all the
aided and unaided schools, considered to be the biggest culprit in lowering learning
outcomes, in which no child is held back till VIII class that straight away set up
wrong precedence to parents as well as teachers in schools that child needs no
supplementary help. However, transition from elementary classes to secondary
classes is also the turning point, if a student moves ahead with weak foundation that
affects the learning outcomes. Now, a bill has been passed to amend the RTE Act to
abolish the ‘no detention policy’ in schools which provides to conduct regular
examination in classes V and VIII and if the child fails, a provision for
re-examination in two month’s time shall be given. Apart from this, it also extends
power to the schools to hold back children, if they fail in re-examination. Currently
a decision has been taken that no readmission for those who fail class 12 twice,
according to a circular issued by a Directorate of Education that in case a student
failed in a class for two consecutive years or in compartmental exams, student will
be invariably counselled about choosing other options like Patrachar Vidyalaya or
National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS), etc., and will not be readmitted as a
regular student.
Further, teacher absenteeism and the shortage of professionally qualified
teachers are some of the other causal factors contributing to low quality of edu-
cation in the primary sector. On the other hand, the share of teacher component in
total SSA budget has been increasing over the years from 35% in 2011–12 to 59%
in 2014–15 (GoI, Economic Survey 2016–17).
However, to address the issue of teacher absenteeism, the biometric attendance
of all the teachers in primary schools that record the arrival and departures with
little control on their activities during the working hours are being explored and put
in public domain to be monitored by local communities and parents. Further, it was
agreed that the issue of absenteeism can be supported by teaching aids and recorded
lectures, etc. through digital learning to fill in for absentee teachers. A pilot project
of biometric attendance is being accompanied with an evaluation of learning out-

comes in one district of every State may be initiated for six months to be later
extended to all districts in three years (GoI, Economic Survey 2016–17).
A provision for teacher training during summer vacations by State Council of
Educational Research Training to help strengthen skills and in turn improving
learning outcomes in children are some of the initial steps inching towards
achieving SDG 4.
As far as in secondary school education is concerned, the main driving aim for
students seems to be only clearing examination through private coaching institute
rather than ensuring relevant learning outcomes. In this context, Banerji in ASER
Report opines that merely universalising the secondary education or building
infrastructure to move children from one stage to the next level of education is not
at all satisfactory for younger generation needs nor does it has the potential to
address the challenges that India has been facing in terms of imparting quality
education and ensuring learning outcomes.
In a recent move, the government reiterated that starting new academic session,
the focus should shift from syllabus completion to improving learning outcomes
from class I to VIII. The indicators pertaining to learning outcomes should be
self-explanatory for the teachers to track the student progress regularly and thereby
introduce corrective measures and communicate progress to the parents.
4.2 Quality-Related Deficiency in Early Childhood Care

and Education
As Target 4.2 emphasises on early childhood care and education, India has one of
the most comprehensive early childhood care and development programme, the
Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) which in 2013 covered 63.5% of
children in the age group of 6 months to six years. This flagship programme since
1975 marks India’s commitment of providing early childhood care and education to
its children on one hand and on the other tackling the issues like malnutrition,
morbidity, reduced learning capacity and child mortality (icds-wcd.nic.in). As
target 4.2 envisages, Article 45 of the Indian Constitution also guarantees to provide
early childhood care and education to all the children until they complete the age of
six years that has direct benefits later in the life cycle. Several international
agencies/development partners including UNICEF, DFID and WFP provide tech-
nical assistance to ICDS programme both at the Centre and State level. UNICEF
had also collaborated with Government of India on a five year Country Programme
Action Plans (CPAP) with an estimated budget of US$ 750 million.
However, despite there has been significant progress in the implementation of
ICDS scheme during the last three consecutive Five Year Plans, both in terms of
increase in number of operational projects and preschool centres like Anganwadi
Centres, it has not led to significant reductions in malnutrition and enhancement of
182 B. Pandey
early childhood learning. However, as SDG 4 emphasises by 2030 to ensure that all
girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and
pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education. In that context,
there is need to have simple teaching aids with a strong focus on the development of
early cognitive skills. Further, a panel of qualified professionals must be provided to
Anganwadi Centres for training of trainers to improve their interactive skills to
prepare the pre-primary children for formal schooling.
Apart from this, many new initiatives like the Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao (BBBP)
scheme has been undertaken by the Government to celebrate the birth of a girl child
and enable her education with an objective to address declining child sex ratio
thereby ensures their survival and protection of the girl child. Recently, Padhe
Bharat Badhe Bharat (PBBB) a nationwide sub-programme of the SSA was
launched to ensure quality at the foundational years of schooling i.e., classes I & II,
as these classes are the important stages for developing the important skill of
reading, writing with comprehension and Mathematics with a purpose. As a
follow-up, a programme to promote reading habits among students up to class VIII,
the National Reading Initiative Programme was launched in 2015–16. Under this
initiative, states are being provided token funds to plan and implement innovative
activities to promote reading. Already 15 states have reported having dedicated
teachers for classes I & II. Many states and UTs have been implementing specific
interventions like ABL in Tamil Nadu, Nalli Kali in Karnataka, Pragya in Gujarat to
develop specific teacher training modules for class I and II teachers. Punjab,
Meghalaya and Delhi have introduced programmes for strengthening teaching of
maths in classes I and II, in Sikkim schools have set up reading corners for children
in the foundational classes through support from community members.
4.3 Recent Interventions
In order to improve the educational level of children and capacity building of

teachers, Digital Initiative has potential to play an important role in providing key
solutions to minimise challenges being faced in the Indian education system. The
Government of India has taken several initiatives for introducing good governance
of school system through ICT-based initiatives in 2015 which includes: Saransh, an
initiative of Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) which allows all
schools for online self-re-evaluation to identify areas of improvement in students,
teachers and curriculum and thereby take necessary measures to implement changes
by comparison of results vis-à-vis other schools of class IX–XII to take actionable
decisions.
Shagun a web portal is a repository of good practices on elementary education
has been developed by State and UTs wise to share success stories to learn from
each other and to have competitive spirit among all the States and UTs. Further, it
has an online monitoring module to measure state-level performances of
educational indicators to enable all the States and UTs to evaluate assessments
efficiently (GoI, PIB, 2019).
Apart from this, NCERT conducts National Achievement Surveys (NAS) to
assess learning outcomes of children in classes III, V, VIII and X. Recently NAS
was held in most of the States and UTs to assess the performance of children of
class II, V and VIII covering around 22 lakh students from 1.10 lakh schools. The
learning outcomes for each class translated in various languages, for subjects like
Language, Mathematics, EVS/Science and Social Sciences up to the elementary
stage in Government and its aided schools have been shared with all the States and
UTs to be used as a point of reference for student’s competencies to be achieved in
these subjects. Similarly, in order to evaluate competency-based assessment of the
students, Government has decided to hold Programme for International Students
Assessment (PISA) to be conducted by OECD which would help in reforming the
examination system in schools that means moving away from rote learning
(GoI, PIB 2019). Shaala Siddhi (Self-assessment of all schools and External
Evaluation of sample schools) an initiative by NIEPA aims to enable all schools to
self evaluate their performance and monitors their strengths and areas of
improvement, both at the elementary and secondary levels. So far, around 9000
schools have implemented Shaala Siddhi covering 25 states and UTs. Further, it has
been decided that now from 2017 onwards the National Achievement Survey would
be conducted rather than every 3 years as per recent practice.
Similarly, through Shala Darpan service-based services have been provided to
School Management Systems to the students, parents and communities. Under
school information services, certain services like management of profiles of schools
as well as students, detailed information of all the employees, leave record, report
cards, SMS alerts for parents/administrators on student and teacher attendance are
being enabled. In order to streamline the availability of textbooks in the remotest
areas, an online platform e-Pathshala has been initiated for showcasing and dis-
seminating digital resources containing textbooks and other learning resources like
audio, video, periodicals and a variety of other print and non-print materials for its
stakeholders-students, teachers, educators, researchers and parents.
One of the most important flagship programme—Aadhar Link under which all
school-going children in the age group of 5–18 years in the country are being
covered under Aadhar which would help in tracking of drop-out children from
school and also for monitoring their academic performance and for ensuring direct
benefit transfers (DBT) to be disbursed to them in cash or kind under various
centrally sponsored schemes. Currently, 23.24 crore children in this age group have
already covered by Aadhar against the total enrolment of 26.07 crore children in the
same age group. Similarly, in States and UTs all the teachers are also being covered
by Aadhar card to prevent fake teachers in the school. A provision of grade wise
photos of the government and aided school teachers are being displayed on the
school notice board to enable all students and their parents to know the regular
teachers and discourage the practice of proxy teachers. Further, according to the
amendment of section 23(2) of the RTE Act, all un-trained in-service teachers in all
types of schools whether Government, aided and private unaided schools should
184 B. Pandey
have to have Central Government authorised minimum qualifications as prescribed

by academic authority by March 2019.
The Government has also launched Swachh Vidyalaya initiative under the
Swachh Bharat Mission with an objective to provide separate toilets for girls and
boys in all government schools. The target was achieved and the States and UTs
reported that 4,17,796 toilet blocks were constructed or made functional in
2,61,400 schools within the given timeline (pib.nic.in, March 19, 2018).
Apart from the government’s recent policy initiatives for qualitative improve-
ment in the field of education, there are some best practices from different countries
that can be replicated in India as well. Singapore is one such country which has
developed a unique high-quality educational system that endorses retention, quality
and efficiency. With its strong pragmatic education policies, Singapore has invested
heavily in education which led to high-quality education (OECD 2011).
Finland is also the best example for India to follow in education sector, where
teaching is highly respectable job and teachers are appreciated because all teachers
need a Master’s degree to qualify for permanent jobs in schools. Education is free at
all levels from pre-primary to higher education. It is said that education system in
Finland has improved not only because of rigorous testing of students or privati-
sation of schools but by strengthening the teachers training programme.
Constitutionally, for all people there are provisions to have equal access to
high-quality education and training irrespective of their ethnicity origin, age criteria,
wealth or place they live. However, except the National Matriculation Examination
at the end of the upper-secondary school, there are no mandatory tests; instead
teachers make their own assessment tests in a tension free environment where
students are not being compared with one another (Maes 2010).
5 Moving Forward to Achieve SDG 4
Education is a colossal issue with the potential to transform the societies of a nation.
One can say that education is the shared responsibility of all the stakeholders’ viz.
respective Centre and State Governments, schools, teachers, administrators, parents
and students as well. In the twenty-first century, India is capable to surge ahead
through its innovative flagship policies and programmes to achieve SDG on edu-
cation within a time frame. Poor learning outcomes and quality of education across
India emerge as the main crux of the problem, has caught the attention of policy-
makers, if tackled at suitable time can be the game-changer for India. Here a strong
will has emerged to achieve SDGs where India is not scared to know where it
stands in the education sector but instead committed to enhance the quality of
education from elementary education to higher education level. Moreover, unless
the parents are convinced about the benefits of learning outcomes in qualitative
terms, attendance, exams, higher grades and results have no significance in edu-
cation that can bring positive changes in their lives.
At the outset, there is an urgent need to guarantee implementation of one year of

pre-school education in all primary section for early childhood care and education
with adequate funding to achieve target 4.2 (Naudeau and Others 2011). Regardless
of the RTE enactments in India, still millions of children are out of school is a
matter of grave concern. And despite having achieved near total-enrolment, to
ensure that no one is left behind as SDG accentuates, there is need for gender parity
at higher education level to achieve SDGs target 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.
As stated above, India has made significant progress in quantitative terms like
construction of school buildings, classrooms, drinking water facilities, separate
toilet facilities and appointment of qualified teachers at elementary level. Despite
such policy projects, learning outcomes in qualitative terms need to be supervised
which remains a major challenge. Therefore in order to promote inclusiveness and
learning outcomes, if there are provisions for expansion of other Navodaya Model
Schools, Kendriya Vidyalayas (KVs), KGBVs and other Open Distance Learning
schools then there are possibilities for India to achieve some initial targets of SDGs.
Navodaya Vidyalayas are the best example of quality learning as Government in its
Achievement Reports revealed that more than 3500 students cracked the Joint
Entrance Examination (JEE) Mains examination which was being conducted by
Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) out of which 481 students got
admitted to one of the premier institution Indian Institute of Technology (IITs) in
India last year. Similarly, Ministry of Human Resource Development has been
planning to expand its KVs network through innovative models which provide
quality education for masses at highly affordable costs. Likewise, as at present there
are around 4000 KGBVs are functional across India that caters the admissions to
girls from Scheduled castes, Scheduled tribes, other backward classes and other
minority and disadvantaged sections of the society can play very crucial inclusive
role in the elementary education.
Often one rejoices at the academic excellence of brighter students thereby
ignoring the performance of the rest of the average students in class; instead, this
approach needs to be changed with the aim to improving the learning outcomes by
teachers through raising the bar of every single student at par with the meritorious
students. As regards the reforms in the teacher education system, Target 4.c
envisages to substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers by 2030 which
can be tackled through pre-service and in-service teacher training education through
total revamping. Then only with the improved learning outcomes of its educated
youth, India will be able to harness the demographic dividend with an improvement
in health, education and skill development.
Positive learning outcomes, mandatory class X Board examination, qualified
teachers, close proximity to school, relevant curricula, provision of proper infras-
tructure including blackboards and boundary walls, safe drinking water facilities,
usable toilets, MDMS and vocational and skill education are some of the deciding
factors and is the need of the hour that can influence the demand for quality
education. These factors have paved the way for attracting students in Government
schools from private schools. The mandate of SDGs can be taken care of by India’s
186 B. Pandey
long-term development planning, considering all efforts being taken to improve

quality of education in Government schools.
In general, the aforesaid selected flagship programmes of India and briefly stated
significant education policies of Singapore and Finland can act as the trendsetters.
Owing to their pragmatic approach and adaptability, they can be replicated in India
as well as through regional cooperation in South Asian region as well. The
Government has to play very effective role in order to bring significant improve-
ment in the education sector. Further, NGOs who play the complementary as well
as supplementary role to the concerted efforts of the government agencies in
imparting education at different levels need to actively and efficiently play their role
in achieving SDGs across different goals. Similarly, efforts should also be made by
NGOs and civil societies to raise general awareness and sensitise the community
about the positive and rationale of quality education for their own benefit.
Despite the large number and multiplicity of flagship programmes and policies,
their effective implementation, accountability and monitoring can pave the way for
better results. In view of their huge number and variety, there is much less justifi-
cation to start new flagship programmes rather than strengthening the existing ones
for more effective implementation for achieving SDG 4. Lack of proper coordination
among various programmes and the organisations/ministries concerned for achieve-
ment of the common goal has found to be generally responsible for duplication of
efforts, wastage of time and financial resources, loss of complementarities and inef-
fective division of labour all leading to low-quality learning outcomes.
SDGs agenda has a very balanced approach towards quality education and
effective learning outcomes. It provides scope for regional cooperation in South
Asia, as sharing of best practices in neighbouring areas can combat cross-domain
challenges. As indicated above, all the goals are interlinked together, so there is a
need to involve all stakeholders relevant to SDGs. There is a need to coordinate the
State and Centre plans to ensure equity in education outcomes along with the need
to invest in quality learning and the importance of technical and vocational training
in the education sector. The allocation of adequate funds to education sector in
India is an essential prerequisite condition for improving access, quality, and
learning outcomes and of course safety and security of all the children.
Standardisation, harmonisation and periodicity of data related to education would
help to measure and quantify the SDG 4 effectively. These indicators can be com-
pared across all states as well as across districts to measure the achievements. This
exercise will also help in understanding where the states lag behind so that targeted
policies and interventions can be directed to achieve desired education outcomes. For
that, it will be essential to strengthen dataset from administrative and household
sources. NITI Aayog has already identified the mapping of the nodal ministries and
departments for each goal that shows the sincerity of the government approach to
achieve Sustainable Development Goals (Appendix 1) (Panmei, M and Abhay
Kumar 2018). Education is a cross-cutting issue and a goal in itself which calls for an
inter-sectoral actions and initiatives along with the allocation of adequate resources to
finance education need to be strictly implemented and reviewed on a regular basis.
Appendix 1
SDG description Linkage SDG targets Centrally sponsored/ Concerned

with other Central Sector Schemes Ministries/
SDGs (CSS) Departments
4 Ensure inclusive SDGs 3, 5, 4.1—By 2030, 1. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan HRD (School
and equitable 8, 10, 12, ensure that all girls 2. National Programme of Education &
quality education 13 and boys complete Mid-Day Meal in Literacy)
and promote free, equitable and Schools (MDM)
lifelong learning quality primary 3. Rashtriya Madhyamik
opportunities for and secondary Shiksha Abhiyan
all education leading 4. National
to relevant and Means-cum-Merit
effective learning Scholarship Scheme
outcomes (NMMSS)
5. Strengthening of
Teacher Training
Institutions
6. Pandit Madan Mohan
Malaviya National
Mission on Teachers
and Teaching
(PMMMNMTT)
7. National Scheme for
Incentive to Girl Child
for Secondary
Education(NSIGSE)
8. Pre-matric scholarships Social Justice &
for SC, OBC and Empowerment
vulnerable groups
9. Pre-matric scholarships
for children of those
engaged in unclean
occupations and prone
to health hazards
10. Pre-matric
Scholarship to
students with
disabilities
11. Other scholarships &
fellowships for SC,
OBC Students
12. Free coaching for SC
students
13. Hostels for SC &
OBC students
14. Pre-matric Tribal Affairs
scholarships for ST
students
15. Pre-matric Minority Affairs
scholarships for
minority students
(continued)
188 B. Pandey
(continued)
16. National Child Labour and
Labour Project Employment
(including
grants-in-aid to
voluntary agencies &
reimbursement of
assistance to bonded
labour)
4.2—By 2030, 1. Umbrella ICDS WCD School
ensure that all girls (Aganwadi Services) Education &
and boys have Literacy
access to quality
early childhood
development, care
and pre-primary
education so that
they are ready for
primary education
4.3—By 2030, 1. Rashtriya Uchhatar HRD
ensure equal Shiksha Abhiyan
access for all 2. Scholarship for
women and men to College and University
affordable and Students
quality technical, 3. Interest Subsidy and
vocational and Contribution for
tertiary education, Guarantee Funds
including 4. Technical Education
university Quality Improvement
Programme (EAP)
5. Post-matric Social Justice &
scholarships for SC, Empowerment
OBC and other Tribal Affairs
vulnerable community
students
6. Post-matric
scholarships for ST
students
7. National Fellowship
and Scholarship for
Higher Education of
ST Students
8. Vocational Training
Centres in Tribal Areas
9. Post-matric Minority Affairs
scholarships for
minorities students
10. Merit-cum-means
based scholarship for
minorities students
for professional and
technical courses
undergraduate and
postgraduate
(continued)
(continued)
11. Free Coaching
&Allied Scheme for
Minorities
12. Support for minorities
students clearing
preliminary
examinations
conducted by UPSC,
SSC, State PSCs, etc.
13. Interest subsidy on
education loans for
overseas studies for
minorities students
14. Maulana Azad
National Fellowship
for minorities
students
15. Multi-Sectoral
Development
Programme for
Minorities (MsDP)
1. Umbrella Programme
for Skill Development
of Minorities:
i. Seek ho aur Kamao
—Skill
Development
Initiatives for
minorities
ii. Upgrading Skills
and Training in
Traditional Arts/
Crafts for
Development
(USTAAD) for
minorities
iii. Nai Manzil-The
Integrated
educational and
Livelihood
initiatives
16. Pradhan Mantri Skill
Kaushal Vikas Development &
Yojana: Entrepreneurship
i. Development of
Skills (Umbrella
Scheme)
ii. Development of
Entrepreneurship
(Umbrella Scheme)
iii. National Board for
Skill Certification
(continued)
190 B. Pandey
(continued)
iv. National Skill
Development
Agency v.
v. Model ITIs/Multi
Skill Training
Institutes
vi. Apprenticeship and
Training (Umbrella
Scheme)
vii. Scheme of
Polytechnics
4.4—By 2030, 1. Pradhan Mantri Skill
substantially Kaushal Vikas Yojana: Development &
increase the i. Development of Entrepreneurship,
number of youth Skills (Umbrella
and adults who Scheme)
have relevant ii. Development of
skills, including Entrepreneurship
technical and (Umbrella Scheme)
vocational skills, iii. National Board for
for employment, Skill Certification
decent jobs and iv. National Skill
entrepreneurship Development
Agency
v. Model ITIs/Multi
Skill Training
Institutes
Training (Umbrella
Scheme)
vii. Scheme of
Polytechnics
2. Vocational Training Tribal Affairs
Centres in Tribal Areas
3. Umbrella Programme Minority Affairs
for Skill Development
of Minorities:
i. Seekho aur Kamao –
Skill Development
Initiatives for
minorities
ii. Upgrading Skills
and Training in
Traditional Arts/
Crafts for
Development
(USTAAD) for
minorities
iii. Nai Manzil-The
Integrated
educational and
Livelihood
initiatives
(continued)
(continued)
4.5—By 2030, 1. National Scheme for HRD (School
eliminate gender Incentive to Girl Child Education &
disparities in for Secondary Literacy)
education and Education (NSIGSE)
ensure equal 2. Prime Minister’s Girls’
access at all levels Hostel
of education and
vocational training
for the vulnerable,
including persons
with disabilities,
indigenous peoples
and children in
vulnerable
situations
3. Assistance to Disabled Social Justice &
Persons for purchase Empowerment
of Fitting Devices
(ADIP)
4. Deendayal Disabled
Rehabilitation
Scheme (DDRS)
Scholarships for
students with
disabilities
5. Support to
Establishment/
Modernisation/
Capacity augmentation
of Braille Presses
6. Establishment of
Colleges for Deaf
7. National Program for
Persons with
Disabilities
8. National Fellowship
for Persons with
Disabilities (PwD)
9. Pre-and post-matric
Scholarship to students
with disabilities
10. National Overseas
Scholarship for
Students with
Disabilities
11. Free Coaching for SC
and OBC Students
12. Boys and Girls
Hostels
(continued)
192 B. Pandey
(continued)
13. SIPDA (Schemes for
the Implementation of
the Persons with
Disabilities (Equal
Opportunities,
Protection of Rights
and Full
Participation) Act,
1995
Kaushal Vikas Development and
Yojana: Entrepreneurship,
i. Development of
Skills (Umbrella
Scheme)
ii. Development of
Entrepreneurship
(Umbrella Scheme)
iv. National Skill
Development
Agency| v.
Model ITIs/Multi
Skill Training
Institutes
Training (Umbrella
Scheme)
vii. Scheme of
Polytechnics
4.6— By 2030, 1. Saakshar Bharat HRD (School
ensure that all Education &
youth and a Literacy)
substantial
proportion of
adults, both men
and women,
achieve literacy
and numeracy
2. Vanbandhu Kalyan Tribal Affairs
Yojana-Development
of Particularly
Vulnerable Tribal
Groups (PVTGs)
(continued)
(continued)
3. National Service Youth Affairs &
Scheme (NSS) 4. Sports
Schemes for Youth
development &
Education (Nehru
Yuva Kendra
Sangathan, National
Programme for Youth
and
Adolescent
Development, etc.)
4.7—By 2030, 1. Saakshar Bharat HRD (School
ensure that all Education and
learners acquire Literacy)
the knowledge and
skills needed to
promote
sustainable
development,
including, among
others, through
education for
sustainable
development and
sustainable
lifestyles, human
rights, gender
equality,
promotion of a
culture of peace
and non-violence,
global citizenship
and appreciation of
cultural diversity
and of culture’s
contribution to
sustainable
development
2. Vanbandhu Kalyan Tribal Affairs
Yojana—Development
of Particularly
Vulnerable Tribal
Groups (PVTGs)
3. National Service Youth Affairs
Scheme (NSS) and Sports
4. Schemes for Youth
development &
Education (Nehru
Yuva Kendra
Sangathan, National
Programme for Youth
and Adolescent
Development, etc.)
(continued)
194 B. Pandey
(continued)
5. Kala Sanskriti Vikas Culture
Yojana
Kaushal Vikas Development and
Yojana: Entrepreneurship
i. Development of
Skills (Umbrella
Scheme)
ii. Development of
Entrepreneurship
(Umbrella Scheme)
iv. National Skill
Development
Agency
v. Model ITIs/Multi
Skill Training
Institutes
Training (Umbrella
Scheme)
vii. Scheme of
Polytechnics
4.a—Build and 1. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan HRD
upgrade education 2.Umbrella Programme
facilities that are for Education of SC,
child, disability ST, OBC and minorities
and gender students
sensitive and
provide safe,
non-violent,
inclusive and
effective learning
environments for
all
3. Umbrella ICDS WCD
4. Umbrella Programme Social Justice &
for Education of SC, Empowerment
OBC and vulnerable
group students
5. Umbrella Programme Tribal Affairs
for Education of ST
students
6. Umbrella Programme Minority Affairs
for Education of
minorities students
(continued)
(continued)
4.b—By 2020, School Education
substantially & Literacy,
expand globally Higher
the number of Education,
scholarships External Affairs,
available to Tribal Affairs
developing
countries, in
particular least
developed
countries, small
island developing
States and African
countries, for
enrolment in
higher education,
including
vocational training
and information
and
communications
technology,
technical,
engineering and
scientific
programmes, in
developed
countries and other
developing
countries
4.c—By 2030, 1. Pandit Madan Mohan HRD, External
substantially Malaviya National Affairs
increase the supply Mission on Teachers
of qualified and Teaching
teachers, including 2. Teachers Training and
through Adult Education
international
cooperation for
teacher training in
developing
countries,
especially least
developed
countries and small
islands developing
States
196 B. Pandey
References
ASER. (2015). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2014. New Delhi: ASER Centre.
ASER. (2017). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2016. New Delhi: ASER Centre.
Chugh, S. (2009). Progress in literacy and elementary education: The study of Himachal Pradesh,
Kerala and Mizoram.
GOI. (2017). Economic Survey 2016–17. Ministry of Finance.
GoI. (2018). Economic Survey 2017–18. Ministry of Finance.
GoI, Planning Commission. (2013). Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012–2017) Social Sectors.
Volume III.
Kumar A., & Others. (2018). Exclusion in Elementary Education and the RTE Act. Working Paper
Series 8, May 2018. Chetanya Kasyap Foundation.
Maes, B. (2010). What makes education in Finland that good? 10 Reform principles behind the
success. https://bertmaes.wordpress.com/2010/02/24/why-is-education-in-finland-that-good-
10-refrom-principles-behind-the-success/.
Mahbub ul Haq Development Centre. (2015). Human Development in South Asia 2015. Lahore.
MHRD. (2017). Three years’ achievements: May 2014–May 2017. MHRD: Government of India.
Naudeau, S., & Others. (2011). Investing in young children: An early childhood development
guide for policy dialogue and project preparation. Washington, D.C: The World Bank.
NEUPA. (2014). Education for all-towards quality with equity: India, Ministry of Human
Resource Development, Govt. of India.
NITI Aayog, GoI. (2015). Social sector service delivery—good practices resource book. UNDP.
OECD. (2011). Strong Performers and Successful Reformers in Education: Lessons from PISA for
the United States.
Pandey, B. (2016). Sharing of social sectors experiences in IBSA: Assessment of initiatives and
way forward. RIS-DP# 201.
Panmei, M., & Abhay, K. (2018). Will India achieve SDG 4 by 2030? Working Paper Series 10,
Chetanya Kasyap Foundation. August.
PIB. (2018). Various Scholarship Schemes of HRD Ministry for Students. Lok Sabha. December
17. pib.nic.in.
PIB. (2019). Government has developed various mechanisms for monitoring of quality of
education. Government of India, PIB, 7 February 2019.
RIS & UN. (2016). India and Sustainable Development Goals: The Way Forward. RIS.
Tiwari, A. (2016). Access equity and inter-sectoral linkages in education. NITI Aayog, HRD
Division. (PPT presented at National Consultation to Road to Sustainable Goals: Focus on
Health and Education, RIS, NITI Aayog, UN, New Delhi.
Chapter 9
Evolving Conceptual Framework
and Monitoring Mechanism for SDGs
in India
Krishna Kumar and P. K. Anand
Abstract At the 70th Summit of UN in September 2015, the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development with 17 goals and 169 targets at its core called Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) was adopted by the 193 Member states. Further to that, an
initial set of 232 global indicators was adopted by the UN General Assembly in July
2017. The 2030 Agenda provided flexibility to the countries to evolve their own set of
indicators relevant in the local circumstances to complement global set of indicators.
In India, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) is tasked
with the responsibility regarding national indicators, while NITI Aayog oversees the
implementation of SDGs. MoSPI had evolved a draft set of national indicators and
placed it in the public domain, which has since been finalized and comprises of 306
indicators which is larger than even the huge 232 global indicator set approved by the
UN General Assembly in July 2017. Management of a large number of indicators
poses a challenge due to its associated cost of collection, processing and dissemination
of data. As per the estimates arrived at by the Sustainable Development Solutions
Network (SDSN), there will be a requirement of USD 1 billion per annum to make the
national statistical systems of IDA-eligible countries capable of monitoring the SDGs.
This paper proposes a set of 50 indicators, which are mainly outcome/output based
indicators, named as Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), to capture the essence and to
effectively monitor and facilitate timely achievement of SDGs and associated targets.

Keywords SDG indicator framework National indicator framework Follow-up

and review Key performance indicators
Authors are thankful to Prof. Sachin Chaturvedi, Director General, RIS for his guidance and
valuable comments at different stages of the study. The views expressed are not necessarily the
views of RIS.
K. Kumar (&) P. K. Anand

Countries (RIS), Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, India
e-mail: krishna.kumar@ris.org.in
P. K. Anand
e-mail: pk.anand@ris.org.in

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_9
198 K. Kumar and P. K. Anand
1 Introduction
The idea of the sustainability has been the part and parcel of the age-old Indian
culture and ethos, manifested through harmony between people and nature. In fact,
India’s National Development Agenda and Policies are mirrored in the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs), adopted at the UN in September 2015 by 193 Member
states. The national government working on the principle of ‘cooperative federal-
ism’, towards which the State Governments are valuable partners, is striving to
provide a life of dignity to all its citizens through its development agenda focusing
mainly on economic prosperity, economic and social inclusion, efficient governance
and peaceful societies, valuing environment, while recognizing contributions of all
stakeholders, including civil societies, multilateral organizations, UN bodies/
agencies.
There are many challenges to be met to be sustainable-like of rising air and water
pollutions, climate change, rapid depletion of groundwater, inadequate means for
conservation of natural resources (soil, water, forests, rivers, glaciers, biodiversity)
as well as lack of decent job opportunities, inequalities, irresponsible consumption,
unsustainable agricultural practices, malnutrition, etc. These challenges are to be
tackled suitably for ensuring sustainable development.
The Government of India (GoI) is committed to inclusiveness and sustainable
development for achieving national development agenda. Hon’ble Prime Minister
on 15 August 2017 announced1 New India Vision 2022 with focus on six princi-
ples2: (i) Poverty Free India, (ii) Dirt and Squalor Free India, (iii) Terrorism Free
India, (iv) Corruption Free India, (v) Castism Free India and (vi) Communalism
Free India. These clearly depict India’s development principles of ‘Sabka Saath
Sabka Vikas’ meaning ‘Collective efforts inclusive development’, and underlying
sustainable driver that poor have the first charge on the national resource, while
respecting environment for economic prosperity. These are imbibed in the action
points listed in the Three-Year Action Agenda3 currently under operation, and set
the national development priorities.
1
Hon’ble Prime Minister’s address on the occasion of 71st Independence day http://www.
pmindia.gov.in/en/news_updates/pm-addresses-nation-from-the-ramparts-of-the-red-fort-on-71st-
independence-day/.
2
Vice Chairman NITI Aayog’s presentation on NEW INDIA @2022 at the Conference of
Governors on October 12, 2017. http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/new_initiatives/NITI%20VC
%20Presentation%20Governors%20Conference_Oct12_En.pdf.
3
India Three Year Action Agenda 2017–18 to 2019–20 available on http://niti.gov.in/
writereaddata/files/coop/IndiaActionPlan.pdf.
9 Evolving Conceptual Framework and Monitoring Mechanism for SDGs … 199
2 The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
On 25 September 2015, the 70 UN Summit adopted a set of 17 global Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs) and 169 associated targets as enshrined in The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development.4 The Paris Climate Agreement (COP 21)5
and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda,6 which are an integral part of the 2030
Agenda, were also adopted in the same year. And in 2015, the Sendai Framework
for Disaster Risk Reduction7 too was adopted. The 2030 Agenda also provided
flexibility to the countries to evolve their own set of indicators relevant in the local
circumstances to complement global set of indicators.
2.1 Follow-up and Review: Global Indicator Framework
The current format of the SDGs has laid a policy framework for the 2030 Agenda.
A rigorous scientific follow-up on their operationalization and implementation
based on the robust set of indicators would be the key to ensure that politically
supported ambition expressed in the Agenda is achieved within the given timeline.
Accordingly, addressing challenges associated with the implementation and the
monitoring of the Agenda has received focused attention at the global, regional,
national and sub-national levels. An initial set of 232 global indicators,8 as evolved
by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group (IAEG–SDG), under the auspices of the UN
Statistical Commission, has since been adopted by the UN General Assembly in
July 2017. In fact, bulk of the theoretical work on the quality standards is yet to be
carried out on many indicators (for instance the 62 Tier III indicators out of 232).9
Users are not generally sure as to how adequately the indicators would measure
monitored phenomenon. Therefore, to evaluate indicators’ relevance, method-
ological soundness, clarity and objectivity in terms of what is being measured, in
4
Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development https://
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld.
5
United Nations Conference of the Parties Twenty-first session (COP21) at Paris, 30 November to
11 December 2015 adopting The Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf.
6
Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for
Development (Addis Ababa Action Agenda). The final text of the outcome document adopted at
the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 13–16
July 2015) and endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 69/313 of 27 July 2015. http://
www.un.org/esa/ffd/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/AAAA_Outcome.pdf.
7
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. https://www.unisdr.org/files/43291_
sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf.
8
Numbering 244 indicators including repetitions.
9
In 2017 the entire set of 232 initial global indicators was grouped under 3 Tiers depending upon
the availability of the data and methodology.
terms of capturing policies affecting people, while simultaneously taking into

account data production and dissemination capacities of the countries official sta-
tistical system have been stressed by the IAEG–SDG. These characteristic are of
utmost importance to ensure that clear and unambiguous messages are conveyed to
users. The IAEG–SDG, under the guidance of UN Statistical Commission, is also
entrusted to take due care of these issues at the time of comprehensive review
exercises to be undertaken in 2020 and 2025.
3 Translating SDGs in the National Context
3.1 Institutional Mechanism
Nationalization and localization of global SDGs and associated targets are impor-
tant steps to pursue global common ambition, as has been set-out in the 2030
agenda. Underscoring the importance of these processes, the GoI has started many
initiatives. NITI Aayog has been made responsible for overall coordination of
SDGs with the support of all stakeholders, including central government ministries
and departments of the state governments, experts, academia, CSOs, think-tanks
and multi-lateral institutions. The Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation (MOSPI) has been given the charge for indicator framework
commensurate with the national policies and priorities and local conditions.
NITI Aayog has constituted a multi-disciplinary Task Force to coordinate
actions under SDGs. It has also organized a series of workshops and regional
consultations in association with the RIS and the UN India for fast-tracking
achievement of SDGs. In fact, a number of domestic policies and programmes are
already in place focusing towards achieving SDGs. The subject domain Ministries
are working along with the NITI Aayog for operationalization of these domestic
policies. Many state governments have established similar institutional mecha-
nisms, and some have established a dedicated centre for implementation of SDGs at
the state level.
3.2 National Policy Thrust
India also took active part, and has placed its Voluntary National Review Report at
the High-level Political Forum in 2017. The Indian Voluntary Review Report, 2017,
termed India as the fastest-growing major economy of the world coupled with high
standards of governance at all levels. India, in fact, has launched many programmes
to achieve SDGs-for instance, universal rural electrification, road and digital con-
nectivity for all, massive expansion of clean and renewable energy, sanitation,
housing for all and universal elementary education as some of the commitments of
the government for achievements within a short period. Several of the Government
programmes contribute directly to the advancement of SDG agenda. A noteworthy
cross-cutting example is the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY), which
happens to be world’s largest financial inclusion programme.
Almost all the preparatory work for the implementation of SDGs has since been
completed. A mapping exercise on SDGs and related targets on Central Ministries,
Centrally Sponsored/Central Sector Schemes and other government initiatives have
been completed and its outcomes are available on the website of NITI Aayog. One
Ministry for each SDG has been designated as the nodal Ministry and charged with
the responsibility of achieving the assigned SDG (six nodal Ministries for SDG 17
due to its diverse and all-pervasive nature). The nodal Ministry is assigned to work
in partnership with the other designated Ministries for fast-tracking achievements of
the Goal.
National and Regional Consultations with all stakeholders including think-tanks,
multilateral organizations, UN organizations/agencies, CSOs, experts and acade-
mia, States/UTs, Central Government Ministries, including MoSPI, have been
undertaken for deciding national policy priorities resonating with different SDGs.
Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS) and UN India
were partners of NITI Aayog in organizing the Consultations for prescribing a way
forward. The nodal and other Ministries are engaged in enhancement of
institutional/implementation capacity and strengthening delivery mechanism for
achieving goals and targets. The Ministries are also contemplating development of
e-learning modules and Mobile Apps, which would be yet another step in this
direction. Similar actions have also been undertaken by many States/UT
Administrations.
3.3 Three-Year Action Agenda
A draft Three-Year Action Agenda, covering years 2017–18 to 2019–20, had been
released by the NITI Aayog. This will also assist in fast-tracking achievement of
SDGs. Parallel with this, work on evolving; Strategy for New India @ 75, docu-
ment was started by NITI Aayog. The Three-Year Action Agenda was finalized by
NITI Aayog in August 2017 and is available on its site in public domain.
The Three-Year Action Agenda is a critical step to achieve SDGs with the
cooperation of all stakeholders. A close look at the Action Agenda reveals per-
ceptible changes made in the recent past to address the needs of the poor while
pursuing growth trajectory. It inter alia covers actions to handle problems associ-
ated with environmental degradation and climate change. Enhancement in income
opportunities and in employment strategy now focuses on entrepreneurship
development rather than pushing entitlement. The social sector service delivery,
such as of education, medical and public health, availability of nutritious food,
water, sanitation, etc., has focus on the ‘quality’ rather than on ‘expansion’.
Economic sector development strategy is a mix of enhancing income/

income-generating opportunities and associated environment/climatechange
dimensions. Protection and conservation of natural resources are receiving prior-
ity attention in the national development programmes. On the health front, its focus
is to minimize out-of-pocket medical expenses by people who are poor and
deprived to also tackle problem of poverty. As the government is committed to
provide affordable health care, a new scheme called ‘Ayushman Bharat’ has been
launched to meet hospitalization needs, which has to be further fine-tuned to ensure
speedy, timely and effective coverage.
Later on, the Strategy for New India @ 75 was also finalized in November
2018,10 which is also available in public domain. State/UT administrations have
also taken active participation in preparation of this document in consonance with
the country’s tradition of cooperative federalism.
Follow-up and review at the national, regional (national plus) and global levels
are an integral part of the 2030 Agenda. Tracking of progress needs to be taken up
by each country in a systematic and transparent way on a regular basis. The GoI and
the State Governments, being responsible and accountable to citizens, are com-
mitted to work together to fast-track implementation of policies and programme for
attaining SDGs and in ensuring that no one is left behind.
3.4 Follow-up and Review: Status of National Indicators’

Framework
As has been perceived in the 2030 Agenda, the GoI felt the need to evolve SDG
indicators in the national context. To accomplish this, the MoSPI established dia-
logues with stakeholders, inviting central ministries and the state governments, and
came out with a set of 281 draft indicators; which were placed in the public domain
on 8 March 2017 seeking feedback.11 A large number of valuable comments were
received from individuals, civil society organizations (CSOs), UN bodies located in
India, and other stakeholders; the comments had been considered by the MoSPI,
which were considered and approved by the Government of India. The Ministry
uploaded the approved list comprising of 306 national indicators12 at their website
in November 2018.
10
NITI Aayog released Strategy for New India @ 75 in November 2018 can be accessed from
http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Strategy_for_New_India.pdf.
11
MoSPI came out with a draft list of 281 indicators and up loaded on http://mospi.nic.in/sites/
default/files/announcements/SDG_DraftNational_Indicators8mar17 for inviting public comments.
12
MoSPI uploaded National Indicator Framework for Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on
its website which is available at http://www.mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/National_Indicator_
Framework_6nov18.pdf.
3.5 Identification of Priority Indicators by NITI Aayog
NITI Aayog’s presentation in February 2018, as available on the webpage,13 had

listed priority indicators to evaluate performance of States/UTs. It later ranked
States/UTs on a set of 62 national indicators in December 2018 to measure progress
on SDGs by covering 13 of the 17 SDGs in its Index.14
Notably, to evolve indicators for different SDG targets is a dynamic exercise.
Modifications/revisions need to be taken up at regular intervals for reflecting
essence of policy/programme priorities and for incorporating updated statistical
technology inventions for compiling more efficient indicators, based on the
cost-effective data gathering and processing methods. In fact, recognizing the data
challenges NITI Aayog also expressed that to initiate the monitoring process, it
decided to priortise some indicators on which State-wise data was available and
considered those indicators for designing the SDG Index (See footnote 14).
3.6 Initiatives Taken by MoSPI
The MoSPI had taken feedback on the list 281 draft national indicators which led to
finalization of the list of 306 national indicators. Government of India in its deci-
sion15 dated 24th October 2018 has clearly reiterated that the SDGs with 17 Goals
and 169 Targets are intended for promoting sustainable, inclusive and equitable
economic growth, for creating greater opportunities for all, for reducing inequali-
ties, and raising basic standards of living, fostering equitable social development
and inclusion, besides promoting integrated and sustainable management of natural
resources and ecosystems. Non-availability of official data at appropriate disag-
gregated levels with definite periodicity, for timely reporting on the basic motto of
‘Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas’; is yet another area needing focussed attention.
MoSPI has also been assigned with important task of reviewing and refining the
NIF for monitoring of SDGs with associated targets vide Cabinet Decision dated
24th October 2018. This, in turn, would act as an input for policy correction for
pursuing national commitment in achieving SDGs. Measuring all the 17 SDGs and
timely reporting progress on the 169 targets is now the desired task. Notably, only
13
NITI Aayog’s presentation at the Meeting with States & UTs on SDGs-23rd Jan-13th Feb 2018.
http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/NITI-Aayog-SDG-Presentation-to-States.pdf.
14
NITI Aayog released SDG India Index in December 2018. They computed a composite score for
each State and UT of India based on their aggregate performance across 13 of the 17 SDGs. It can
be accessed from http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/SDX_Index_India_21.12.2018.pdf.
15
Press Information Bureau 24-October-2018 News Item relating to Cabinet approves
National Monitoring Framework on Sustainable Development Goals. It can be accessed at file:///
C:/Users/RISC-170/Desktop/Follw%20up%20action%20by%20MoSPI%20on%20Government%
20decision%20on%20SDG%20indicator%20framework/Cabinet%20approves%20National%20
Monitoring%20Framework%20on%20Sustainable%20Development%20Goals.html.
twelve years are now left in the implementation of the SDGs. In fact, there are many
SDG targets which are to be achieved much before the year 2030. Some such
targets are even slated for the year 2020, and at various international fora, India has
committed for attaining SDGs within the target dates. Thus, this is the right time to
take stock of the situation for fast-tracking achievements under the SDGs of all
targets including the pre-2030 targets. Thus, the MoSPI has to play a bigger and
challenging role in successful implementation of the national SDGs.
On 24th October 2018, the Government of India constituted a High -Level
Steering Committee for periodical review and refining of the National Indicator
Framework (NIF) for monitoring Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with
associated targets.16
The Committee is chaired by the Chief Statistician of India; Secretary, Ministry
of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI), with the Secretaries of data
source Ministries and representatives from NITI Aayog/MoSPI, and Secretaries of
the other related Ministries as special invitees. The Committee is mandated to
review National Indicator Framework (NIF); including refinement of the indicators
from time to time. It is envisaged that the NIF will also help in the outcome-based
monitoring and reporting on the progress of SDGs at the national level.17
The Steering Committee has been assigned with various responsibilities
expected to impact upon the overall development ecosystem of the country. It has
been made responsible for mainstreaming global SDGs into on-going national
policies and to come out with strategy and action plans to address the develop-
mental challenges that are important and critical in achieving SDGs given our
national policies and priorities. MoSPI is to also bring out analytical Reports based
on the NIF with the assistance of data inputs to be provided by the data source
Ministries/Departments at required intervals and disaggregation for national and
sub-national reporting of SDGs.18 Such Reports would facilitate assessment of
progress, identify challenges and generate recommendations for follow-up at the
national level.
Later on, the MoSPI constituted sector-specific sub-committee viz., Technical
Advisory Committee19 under the chairmanship of Director General, MoSPI, to
examine and suggest addition/deletion/modification of indicators and their
methodology for National Indicator Framework. The recommendations of the
Technical Advisory Committee will be submitted to High Level Streeing
Committee for its consideration and approval.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid.
18
Ibid.
19
Government of India Gazette Notification dated 2nd January, 2019 published by Ministry of
Statistics and Programme Implementation (Central Statistics Office) constituting High level
Steering Committee (HLSC). The terms of reference of HLSC envisaged constitution of a
Technical Advisory Committeeunder Director General, MoSPI for assisting HLSC. It is available
at http://www.mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/Gazette%20notification.pdf.
Though the NIF is deficient on certain aspects; these are likely to be addressed in
the coming times. The indicators evolved would serve the immediate need of
assessing country’s current situation from the lens of SDGs. The indicators evolved
are a combination of both the qualitative and quantitative indicators. It is a fact that
measuring progress of the SDG targets based on a qualitative indicator is chal-
lenging for a statistician and requires innovative skills.
Some national indicators are oblique in the sense that they do not point directly
about the objective of the national programmes mirrored in the SDG target. Many
targets (particularly under Goal 17) are unfortunately orphaned, though they seem
to be important in the national context. Undoubtedly, outcome-based reporting of
progress on all the 169 targets is necessary, which has also been contemplated in the
government decision. The country can’t afford to miss any of the 169 SDG targets;
as all are deeply intertwined/interconnected.
4 A Suggested Framework and Way Forward
4.1 Expectations from MoSPI
Towards first step, MoSPI should undertake the mapping of the official data
ecosystem as well as of establishing metadata for the SDG indicators’ framework;
and this would be a step forward for mainstreaming SDGs into the national
development agenda.
Secondly, the MoSPI should convene the meetings of Technical Advisory
Committee and also of the High Level Steering Committee, for the following:
1. Whether any identified national indicator needs to be modified to make it more
responsive to the concerned target it is measuring.
2. To identify all such indicators in the list for which data is being produced by the
official statistical system, i.e. these are akin to Tier I characteristic of global
indicators.
3. To also identify such other indicators for which data is not yet being produced
by the official statistical system. If the data is currently not being produced by
the official statistical system, to see whether established methodology is avail-
able, i.e. these are akin to Tier II characteristic of global indicators. If so, to
suggest cost-effective measures for collection of data and compilation of the
indicators.
4. To identify such indicators for which established methodology is not yet
available, i.e. these are akin to Tier III characteristic of global indicators. If so, to
commission methodological studies to describe clear concept, definition and
standards, so that these are available in the medium run.
Further, the other related tasks to be accomplished by MoSPI include the

following:
(a) Based on the existing set of approved national indicators, MoSPI should come
out with a well-defined monitoring and evaluation framework. It may include
elaboration on data flow mechanism, data custodian agency, data analysis and
report writing agency, dissemination agency, etc. and become integral part of
the National Indicator Framework (NIF). This will make NIF more credible,
complete and robust. Only a robust NIF can facilitate course correction of
policies/strategies/actions for better utilization of various resources for timely
fructification of SDGs, meeting country’s aspirations for assessing whether the
achievements under each national indicator are on track or need some push or
reorientation, to timely achieve SDGs.
Simultaneously, MoSPI is required to work on defining meta-data for each
indicator; giving rationale of choice of indicators, definition of various terms
and related concepts used, methodological standards, validation procedure,
periodicity, disaggregation level, data sources, etc. These steps would also
ensure generation of comparable data series.
(b) Baseline data for many indicators are not available, which need to be generated.
Wherever data are not available for the precise baseline date of 31st December
2015, statistically sound estimates should be made from the data available for
the nearest date. It is quite relevant to add here that the source of data should be
uniform for any indicator to make a meaningful inter-state comparison and in
assigning rankings/traffic-light categories. In a few cases, the end of MDG era
data can be useful, if a similar indicator had existed under the MDGs also, e.g.
maternal mortality ratio.
Once the Baseline data becomes available, various possible future scenarios
should be evolved for each indicator. Such scenarios should invariably include
the ‘Business as Usual’ scenario, which would throw up an estimate for 2030
and indicate likely inadequacy to achieve the desired indicator level and in turn
the Goal. This would also provide a business as usual trajectory as well as the
annual increase rate (for positive indicators like 3.2.3: Percentage of children
aged 12–23 months fully immunized (BCG, Measles and three doses of
Pentavalent vaccine) or an annual decrease rate (for negative indicators like
3.2.1: Under-five mortality rate) for the indicator levels. Additional scenario
choices should be included to make the country achieve the target; some of
which were based on the relevant national policy, like the national health policy
(with due projections beyond the timelines covered). In view of the fact that
national requirement on many indicators may be in achieving a certain indicator
level at a faster pace than stipulated under SDGs, as such for the related
indicators steeper trend lines should be drawn. For instance, due to high inci-
dence of stunting level, India just can’t plan to reduce stunting by only 40% of
its baseline level by year 2025, as is envisaged under SDG target 3.2.
(c) MoSPI should at the outset prepare and place in public domain the SDG
Baseline Report for the country as well as each State/UT as on 31st December
2015. Essentially the Baseline report should cover such data on national indi-
cators which pertains to a date as close as possible to 31st December 2015.
(d) MoSPI should bring out a regular preferably annual, monitoring Report on
SDGs starting from the financial year 2018–19, if not since 2015–16. Only
about twelve years now remain to achieve the SDGs. In fact, many targets are
to be achieved much prior to 2030 even as early as by 2020. The annual report
would serve as a background framework for fast-tracking SDGs with special
focus on achieving targets specifically the early ones to be met.
The annual progress reports on SDG indicators should be drilled down to state
and district levels. Drilling down is a very important exercise for successful
implementation of the SDGs at the field level. District Collector/Deputy
Commissioner of a district must be aware of as to where his District stood when
he took over and to ensure that it moves fast enough to achieve SDGs. The
same holds true of the Local self-government bodies—both rural and urban
District Level Officers (DLOs)/State/UT level Heads of Department, on the
SDGs related to the activity of her/his department and on other connected
SDGs. Obviously, political executive, academic institutions, think-tanks, civil
society organizations, media, private sector, public sector and other stake-
holders who need to be actively involved to generate adequate traction.
It is very important that while sharing annual progress the likely year of
achievement for each indicator is computed for the country as well as each
State/UT to take corrective actions like additional funding and provision of
other resources, which may be promptly galvanized for such States/UTs.
(e) The institutional capacity of data production, analysis and dissemination is
limited in India to meet development requirements and, in particular, for SDGs.
The MoSPI needs to undertake an immediate exercise to enhance statistical
capacity of the system. For this, the modernization of official statistical system,
including central and state statistical system, is a must. The MOSPI with the
guidance of the National Statistical Commission, should take up a proactive
role in addressing capacity challenges confronted by the Central as well as State
statistical systems in yielding required credible and timely data and statistics at
the desired levels of disaggregation with defined periodicity and appropriate
disaggregation level. As a large set of data are required for proper monitoring
and evaluation of SDGs, the traditional sources alone of data collection through
sample surveys, census and administrative records would not be sufficient for
meeting such an enormous requirement. While survey and census data are
costly affairs, the administrative data suffers from its own limitation of
non-representativeness. The available data classifications do not talk to each
other and as such data integration becomes quite difficult. Non-standardization
of concepts and definitions of data collection and dissemination is an added
challenge. The Ministry should, therefore, look for alternative data sources, and
for these undertake the necessary methodological studies.
(f) Recognizing the above facts, the Union Cabinet while approving national
indicator framework for monitoring SDGs has advocated the use of the latest IT
technologies in data collection and dissemination. The Ministry should examine
the Cape Town Global Action Plan in the national context, and adopt relevant
recommendation for urgent implementation. Of course, the awareness creation
and advocacy is an important component for modernizing the system, and
should be done aggressively, besides the use of appropriate technologies for
capturing primary data, their analysis and dissemination through latest available
software packages.
(g) To make data transmission more credible MoSPI should provide data through a
Central server. It should co-ordinate with the line Ministries and collect sectoral
data from them for further timely dissemination of authentic data to all con-
cerned including researchers, academia, experts, civil society, UN agencies/
multilateral organizations, etc.
(h) At present, the country does not have any national policy for the development
of statistical system; therefore, a need arises to come out with a draft national
statistical policy. Such draft policy should be first placed in the public domain
and deliberated upon with stakeholders including public, to finalize it to evolve
a suitable Strategy, followed by evolving an Action Plan. While doing so, the
total financial requirements for modernization of the statistical system should be
worked out, and additional budget requirement be placed before the govern-
ment for suitable funding.
5 Identification of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
The World Bank’s Working Paper (WPS8481)20 together with the UN Department
of Economic & Social Affairs (DESA) Working Paper,21 provides a broad frame-
work for countries for prioritization of specific Goals and SDG indicators.
This paper takes the requisite work further for India and evolves a set of key
performance indicators, conforming to the principles, upheld in the
above-mentioned working papers. Choice of these indicators does not represent
importance of a particular SDG target, as all SDGs and the targets under them are
globally equally important or there can be certain targets which may have com-
paratively lesser relevance for India; for example, targets seeking specific action
from the developed countries.
20
Sustainable Development Goals Diagnostics-An Application of Network Theory and
Complexity Measures to Set Country Priorities (June 2018) can be accessed at http://documents.
worldbank.org/curated/en/270771529500170,694/pdf/WPS8481.pdf.
21
Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of targets (March
2015) can be accessed at http://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2015/wp141_2015.pdf.
However, so far as the measurement of the progress of the targets is concerned,

data collection, processing and dissemination involve substantial cost. Any highly
loaded indicator framework would increase burden on the government exchequer.
As per the estimates arrived at by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network
(SDSN), there would be a requirement of USD 1 billion per annum to make
national statistical systems of IDA-eligible countries capable of monitoring
SDGs.22 The actual cost obviously will vary depending upon the number of indi-
cators, their periodicity, disaggregation level, etc. in measurement framework.
In view of the above, the need of the hour is to keep the cost at an optimal level
so as to use scarce resources properly for monitoring and implementation of such
policies relevant to the context of national needs and priorities and at the same time
capturing essence of SDGs. A concerted view would, therefore, have to be taken
that strikes balance between output/outcome-based indicators and input/process
indicators, by keeping the latter at the minimal possible number. This paper has
accordingly evolved a set of 50 key performance indicators (KPIs) which are listed
in the Table at Annexure. The salient features of the key performance indicators
(KPIs) selected in this paper are as follows:
1. The approach adopted is to synergize the domestic policy objectives with the
internationally agreed objectives, and thus keeping in view trade-off between
approved list of national indicators and global indicator framework.
Accordingly, broad aim is to judge and capture sustainability umbrella over
time, while tracking institutional and policy performance and measuring pro-
gress not only in absolute numbers but by linking it to the achievement of the
SDGs as a whole.
2. Focus is primarily on the outcome indicators and not on the input or process
indicators. The indicators evolved, however, may be complemented by pro-
gramme managers through process/input/additional outcome indicators to
internalize associated factors leading to achievement or otherwise of the
programme/policy objectives and ultimately SDG targets.
3. A generic indicator is included right at the beginning of the list to assess how
much progress has been made on the targets slated for 2020, which is suggested
to be expanded from the next year to cover the 2025 and 2030 stipulated targets.
4. Other proposed indicators are listed against the relevant predominant SDG.
However, the possible inter-connect among proposed indicators has also been
harnessed. For instance, a number of proposed indicators cover multidimen-
sional poverty, besides the ones listed against SDG 1.
5. The proposed set has only 50 indicators, far less than the 232 initial global
indicators, and the 306 indicators in the NIF, to keep the list crisp for sharper
focus by utilizing inter-connects.
22
Data for Development: A Needs Assessment for SDG Monitoring and Statistical Capacity
Development, July 15, 2015 can be accessed at http://unsdsn.org/resources/publications/a-needs-
assessment-for-sdg-monitoring-and-statistical-capacity-development/.
6. Last but not the least, as the role of a good statistician is not akin to a pathologist
limited to measurement, but of a forward-looking stakeholder, focus is to select
to the extent possible, such indicators, which capture the essence of the SDGs
including preamble, to facilitate timely achievement of SDGs.
Keeping the number of KPIs manageable would help enhancing usability by all
stakeholders. Keeping limited number of indicators ceteris paribus has an added
advantage in terms of cost of collection of relevant data.
6 Conclusion
This paper proposes a set of actions that can be undertaken by the concerned
agencies of the Government to stimulate implementation and timely achievement of
SDGs. In fact, only twelve years are now left in the implementation of the SDGs.
Moreover, there are many SDG targets which are to be achieved much before the
year 2030. Some such targets are even slated as early as for the year 2020. Besides,
the country is under international obligations for achieving SDGs within stipulated
time framework.
Given the preceding situation, and to steer towards more meaningful monitoring,
this paper proposes a set of 50 national indicators covering all the 17 SDGs
(Table Annexed). These indicators reflect broad objectives and ambitions of the
SDGs, which can be interpreted in the national context. These are primarily
outcome-based indicators aimed at to capture the essence, and to effectively
monitor and facilitate timely achievement of SDGs and associated targets. With a
few exceptions, these are not merely a sub-set of draft national indicators/final set of
national indicators or global SDG indicators.
The paper also intends to stimulate thinking among all stakeholders involved in
implementation of SDGs and preparing national monitoring indicators and Reports
as to what approach should be taken for measuring progress in timely achieving the
targets.
It is expected that the actions suggested above and requisite steps on the high-
lighted issues by the concerned agencies would meet country’s aspirations for
assessing whether the achievements under each national indicator so far are on track
or need some push or reorientation, to timely achieve SDGs.
Annexure
Indicator Indicator Brief genesis Existing/ Remarks

no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
1. Proportion of the To provide a MoSPI Should further
early timeline (2020) thumb-nail sketch of Annual expand coverage to
targets for which the progress on each Country include
indicator progress national indicator Report on intermediate
and likely year of SDG timeline (2025) and
achievement placed Progress final timeline
in public domain (2030) targets
SDG 1 End poverty in all its forms everywhere
2. Proportion of To capture status of NITI Aayog Data is available
population below economic poverty with disaggregation
the national Poverty at State and Rural/
Line Urban levels
3. Proportion of people To identify NITI Aayog Till a robust
at risk of poverty population who are national definition
just above the is evolved can take
economic poverty— national poverty
and maybe caught line plus its two
into the poverty trap deciles. Element of
due to any shock. subsidy on food
Identification of accessed under
such people will PDS; health
keep at bay people facilities available/
marginally above insurance coverage
the economic etc. can also be
poverty norm and accounted for to
help sustained focus on the most
elimination of vulnerable
economic poverty.
State-wise and
Rural/Urban
disaggregation is
possible
4. Percentage of To capture extent of NSSO
population having socio-economic Surveys
access within 2 km inclusion
from the place of
residence to
facilities of PDS Fair
Price Shop, health
care facilities,
primary education,
and banking service
facilities
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
SDG 2 End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable
agriculture
5. Prevalence of To identify those NFHS
malnutrition among children whose
children under growth is not in
5 years of age accordance with the
(stunting, wasting, international
underweight, norms-height for age
overweight) (stunting), weight
for height (wasting),
too light for age
(under weight), too
heavy for age
(overweight). It will
reflect nutritional
status among
children
6. Prevalence of To measure NFHS Can be expanded to
micronutrient vulnerability to cover more
deficiency among adverse impact of micronutrients
children under micronutrient
5 years of age deficiency
(Vitamin A and
Iron)
7. Proportion of gross To indicate an MoAFW
cropped area under important
organic farming contribution to
sustainable
agriculture that helps
in protecting the soil
and other natural
resources and
biodiversity. It will
enhance water use
efficiency and also
enhance soil fertility
8. Proportion of net ‘Proper’ means MoAFW To, later on, add
cropped agricultural neither high nor low, micronutrients
area with proper as high will cause air
NPK balance and water pollution,
whereas low will
harm biodiversity
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
SDG 3 Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
9. Life expectancy at To measure general RGI
birth health and overall
mortality level in the
population and
throw light on the
quality of health care
services available. It
also provides a
snapshot of the
overall mortality
characteristics for
the population
10. Maternal mortality To capture the risk RGI
ratio (per 100,000 of death during
live-births) pregnancy or within
42 days after a live
birth
11. Under-5 mortality It being mortality RGI
rate (per 1000 rate among young
live-births) children measures
child health and
well-being, and,
more broadly, social
and economic
development
12. Infant mortality rate It reflects the access RGI
(per 1000 of children and
live-births) communities to
basic health
interventions such as
vaccination, medical
treatment of
infectious diseases
and adequate
nutrition
13. Neonatal mortality It being mortality MoHFW
rate (per 1000 rate during the first
live-births) 28 completed days
of live births and
measures their
health and
well-being, and,
more broadly, social
and economic
development
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
14. Mortality rate To assess the extent MoHFW
attributed to of burden from
cardiovascular premature mortality
disease, stroke, due to
cancer, diabetes or non-communicable
chronic respiratory diseases in the
disease population
15. Tuberculosis To measure MoHFW-
incidence (per reduction in the
100,000 population) number of cases of
this disease burden
16. Out-of-Pocket To assess the burden NHFS/
Spending (OoPS) as which the people NSSO
percentage of the bears to avail health
total health services
expenditure
17. Death rate due to It is a reflection on MoRTH
road traffic accidents
the road as well as
traffic conditions
SDG 4 Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning
opportunities for all
18. School Education To capture the NITI/MHRD
Quality Index learning outcomes
(SEQI) among school
children
19. Percent of people To indicate M/o Skill
aged 15–49 years employability of Development
having formal skill work force
training
20. Population aged 25– To indicate MHRD
35 have completed employability of
technical education youth in better-paid
technical jobs
SDG 5 Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
21. Child sex ratio To indicate relative RGI
to the natural level
the extent of
perverse preference
of society for male
child, is also
indicative of
sex-selective
abortion and
infanticide
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
22. Female Labour force To capture gender MoSPI
Participation Rate gaps in labour force
participation rates
SDG 6 Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
23. Proportion of To indicate the MoDW&S
population using degree to which the
toilets having proper excreta remains
hand-washing isolated from human
facility contact and the
hygiene gets priority
for improving health
outcome
24. Change in water-use To measure the MoWR
efficiency over time efficiency of the use
of water resources
25. Change in Water To capture MoWR
Productivity improvement in
productivity of water
defined as GDP per
cubic meter of total
freshwater
withdrawal
SDG 7 Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
26. Proportion of To capture MoP
population getting at deprivation of such
least 12 h of power population who do
supply in a day not have access to
availability of power
for at least 12 h a
day
27. Share of renewable To measure the MNRE
energy in total share of renewable
energy consumption energy actually
consumed
SDG 8 Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable Economic growth, full and productive
employment and decent work for all
28. Annual growth rate To measure MoSPI
of real GDP per improvement rate of
capita the average standard
of living of
population
29. Unemployment Rate To measure the MoSPI
extent to which the
labour supply
remains
underutilized
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
30. Proportion of youth To measure in MoL
(15–24 years) not in broader sense the
education or untapped potential
employment or of youth labour
training (NEET) market entrants
SDG 9 Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and
foster innovation
31. Proportion of rural To capture rural MoSPI NSS House listing
population who live connectivity with an (schedule 0.0)
within 2 km of an all-weather road Block 7 coding
all-weather road structure for
distance for
facilities from
village/UB be
suitably modified to
capture the
indicator
32. Industry sector To indicate the level MoSPI
employment as a of industrialization
proportion of total as well as the
employment potential of jobs
created in the
industrial sector
33. Share of R&D To capture the total
expenditure to GDP expenditure incurred
on R&D in relation
to GDP
34. Energy Productivity To measure the ratio MoP
of output divided by
energy consumption
to give an
understanding of the
energy efficiency of
the economy
SDG 10 Reduce inequality within and among countries
35. Growth rate of per To capture disparity MoSPI
capita household in growth of
expenditure among expenditure of the
the bottom 40 four lowest deciles,
percent of the leading to increase
population and the in the inequalities
total population
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
SDG 11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
36. Proportion of urban To capture MoSPI/RGI
population living in inadequacy of
slums, informal minimal housing
settlements or facilities in urban
inadequate housing areas
37. Average Annual To capture CPCB
Mean of PM 2.5 air-quality in cities
Levels in major
cities
38. Number of Deaths To capture the MHA
due to natural degree of natural
disaster (including disasters.
water-related Occurrence of
disaster) per lakh natural disaster is
population hit by also one of the
natural disaster indications of effects
of climate change
SDG 12 Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
39. Domestic material To give a broad MoEFCC
consumption per indication of
capita material use
efficiency
40. Percentage of waste To broadly capture MoEFCC
generated recycled the extent to which
the waste has been
made worth re-use
SDG 13 Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
41. Green House Gas To indicate the MoEFCC
emission per unit of degree to which
GDP efforts have been
made to minimize
the effect of climate
change
SDG 14 Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable
development
42. Protected Terrestrial To measure the MoES
and marine area to progress toward the
total terrestrial area conservation,
restoration and
sustainable use of
marine ecosystems
and their services
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
SDG 15 Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably
manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt
biodiversity loss
43. Forest area as a To provide an MoEF&CC
proportion of total indication of the
land area relative extent of
forests in a country
44. Red list index To measure change MoEF&CC
in aggregate
extinction risk
across groups of
species
SDG 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access
to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
45. Number of Victims To provide an MHA
of Intentional indication towards
Homicide (per lack of physical
100,000 population) security
46. Number of court To capture the MoLJ
cases pending per expediency of
100,000 population justice available to
citizens
47. Number of persons To broadly capture MHA
charge sheeted for formal action against
corruption and corrupt public
bribery under IPC servants
(per 100,000
population)
SDG 17 Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for
sustainable development
48. Total financial and To capture MoF
technical assistance contribution of
received from rest of global partnership in
the world as towards
percentage of total implementation of
revenue receipts SDGs
49. Trade deficit with To indicate the DGC&IS
developed countries efforts made by the
as a percentage of developed countries
trade with them to liberalize imports
(continued)
(continued)
no. potential data
source
1 2 3 4 5
50. Total number of To measure Annual
statistical personnel government efforts Report
—imparted training in enhancing MoSPI
at NSSTA technical capacity of
the national
statistical system
In order to keep the number of priority indicators handy, but at the same time to have a broad feel
of other indicators covered under the national indicator framework, a progress measuring generic
indicator titled, ‘Proportion of the early timeline (2020) targets for which indicator progress and
likely year of achievement placed in public domain’, is included as the first priority indicator.
Initially (say, during 2018) progress on the early timeline (2020) targets may be given (up to the
previous year) which should be expanded in the reporting in 2019 to cover the intermediate
timeline (2025) and the (remaining) final timeline (2030) targets
References
Asian Development Bank. (2017). Key indicators for Asia and the Pacific, 48th Edn.
Blanc D. Le. (2015, March). Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a
network of targets. Department of Economic & Social Affairs Working Paper No. 141.
El-Maghrabi, M. H., Gable, S., Rodarte, I. O., & Verbeek, J., Sustainable development goals
diagnostics an application of network theory and complexity measures to set country priorities.
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 8481.
Government of Andhra Pradesh. Socio Economic Survey 2016–17. Integrated Monitoring
Framework for Sustainable Development.
Human Rights Policy Brief. (2015, October). The Measure of Progress. How human rights should
inform the Sustainable Development Goals indicators?
ICLEI Briefing Sheet—Urban Issues, No. 06. Measuring, Monitoring and Evaluating the SDGs.
Jütting, J. (2016). Capacity building, yes—but how to do it? United Nations World Data Forum.
Posted November 1, 2016.
Lebada, A. M. (2016). Member states, statisticians address SDG monitoring requirements. IISD
knowledge sharing hub. March 8, 2016.
MacFeely, S., & Barnat N., United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Statistical
Capacity Building for Sustainable Development: Developing the fundamental pillars necessary
for modern national statistical systems.
Maxwell, S. L., Milner-Gulland, E. J., Jones, J. P. G., Knight, A. T., Bunnefeld, N., Nuno, A.,
et al. (2015). Being smart about SMART environmental targets. Science, 347(6226), 1075–
1076.
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India. (2017). Draft
National Indicator Framework for Sustainable development Goals (SDGs)-inviting the
comments from general public and experts.
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India. (2018). Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs)—National Indicator Framework.
NITI Aayog, Government of India. Three Year Action Agenda 2017–18 to 2019–20.
NITI Aayog, Government of India, 2018. Strategy for New India @ 75.
Paris21. (2004). A guide to designing a National Strategy for the Development of Statistics
(NSDS), PARIS21 Secretariat.
Paris21. (2015). A road map for a country-led data revolution.
Ploug, N. (2016). Reflections on the UN world data forum. United Nations World Data Forum.
Posted November 22, 2016.
RIS. (2016). India and sustainable development goals: The way forward.
RIS. (2018). SDG 2 Roadmap Framework.
RIS. (2018). Discussion Paper: #225. Commonwealth and Sustainable Development Goals.
RIS. (2018). Discussion Paper: # 232. Achieving SDG 4 in India: Moving from quantity to quality
education for all.
RIS. (2018). Discussion Paper: # 234. Evolving conceptual framework and monitoring mechanism
for SDGs in India.
RIS. (2018). Discussion Paper:# 238. Pathways for country’s official statistical system to surmount
over policy midget.
Sustainable Development Solutions Network. (2015). Indicators and a monitoring framework for
the sustainable development goals. Launching a data revolution for the SDGs. In: A report by
the Leadership Council of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Revised working
draft (Version 7).
Sustainable Development Solutions Network. (2015). Data for development: A needs assessment
for SDG Monitoring and Statistical Capacity Development.
UNDP. (2017, September). Guidance note, data for implementation and monitoring of the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, Doc. A/RES/70/1.
United Nations. (2015). Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on
Financing for Development. The final text of the outcome document adopted at the Third
International Conference on Financing for Development (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 13–16 July
2015) and endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 69/313 of 27 July 2015.
United Nations Economic and Social Council. (2017). Report of the inter-agency and expert group
on sustainable development goal indicators. 48th Session of the Statistical Commission.
United Nations General Assembly, Seventy-first session, 10 July 2017. Work of the statistical
commission pertaining to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Resolution adopted
by the General Assembly on 6 July 2017.
United Nations Statistics Division, Workshop on Statistics for SDGs, 12–13 April 2017.
Implementation of the SDG indicator framework. Translating global and regional initiatives on
data and statistics into country level development plans and actions.
UN OWG. (2014). Introduction to the proposal of the Open Working Group for the Sustainable
Development Goals. Outcome document as of 19.6.2014 (Online).
UN Statistics Division. (2015). Discussion paper on Principles of Using Quantification to
Operationalize the SDGs and Criteria for Indicator Selection. ESA/STAT/441/2/58A/14. UN
Statistical Division, New York.
UN Statistical Commission. (2015). Technical report by the Bureau of the United Nations
Statistical Commission on the process of the development of an indicator framework for the
goals and targets of the post-2015 development agenda (Working draft).
Part II
Role of Actors and Partnership
Chapter 10
The Parliament and the SDGs
Atul Kaushik
Abstract The primacy of the role of representatives of the people in the evolution
and implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has been evi-
dent in the way the Indian Parliament participated consistently and continuously in
the process from the beginning, both in international conferences and at the national
level in the debates in the parliament. Their knowledge of the grassroots situation in
their constituencies and their experience in evolving and implementing national
development goals through various oversight mechanisms that the parliamentary
procedures offer place them in a vantage position to monitor as well drive the goals
towards achievement. Moving motions to have targeted discussions on SDGs in the
Houses of Parliament, using the question hour to ask questions relating to SDGs,
convening national and international meetings to emphasise what works and using
the parliamentary committee processes to highlight SDG related issues before the
Ministries and Departments give them the ability to make the required difference in
terms of timely implementation of the SDG targets. One noteworthy innovation of
the Indian parliament has been the institution of the Speaker’s Research Initiative,
which provides a forum for members of parliament to have a deeper discourse with
experts on various subjects relevant to the SDGs and using the knowledge gathered
in these interactions to have informed debates in the House, thus bringing in focus
the actions that the executive arm of the government has to focus on to ensure not
only the timely achievement of SDGs but also quality outcomes of the efforts.

Keywords SDGs International parliamentary conferences IPU CPA

Parliamentarians MPLAD scheme Convergence Quality outcomes Speaker’s
Research Initiative (SRI)
Atul Kaushik—The views expressed are personal.
A. Kaushik (&)
New Delhi, India
e-mail: atulkaushik@yahoo.com

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_10
224 A. Kaushik
1 Introduction
The uneven achievement of targets set for the Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs: 2000–2015) triggered the need for a more participative and inclusive
process for the determination of the new goals for the future of the planet. At the
conceptual level, the interconnectedness of the issues that affect development was a
paramount realisation in crafting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in
Agenda 2030 (2016–2030). At the operative level, SDGs aim at transformative
change, with equitable and rights-based outcomes, arrived at through an inclusive
process that enhances sustainability at the global, regional, national and local levels.
The goals are expected to be universally applicable to all countries, while taking
into account the different national realities, capacities and levels of development,
respecting national policies and priorities. Therefore, SDGs were developed
through an open and inclusive process of engagement between the United Nations
(UN) Member States, Parliaments, civil society, private sector and the general
public.
Unlike in the case of MDGs when Parliamentarians got involved in their
implementation at a late stage, they engaged in inputting into the evolution of SDGs
from early on. In its Communiqué at the 128th Assembly in March 2013 in Quito,
Ecuador, the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) noted1 that it will be more important
than ever for parliaments to assert their legitimate place in the decision-making
process at the national as well as international levels, thus giving a clarion call for
parliaments to participate in the evolution of SDGs. In their Hanoi Declaration in
April 2015, adopted at their Assembly immediately preceding the adoption of
SDGs by the UN, Parliamentarians of the IPU2
Commit[ted] to doing our utmost to strengthen national ownership of the goals, particularly
by making them known to our constituents. People must understand how the goals are
relevant to their lives. As representatives of the people, we are responsible for ensuring that
each and every voice is heard in the political process without discrimination and irre-
spective of social status. We commit to translating the goals into enforceable domestic laws
and regulations, including through the critical budget process. Each country must do its part
to ensure that all the goals are met.
The active involvement of parliamentarians was duly acknowledged by the international
community while adopting the Agenda 2030 at the UN3:
We acknowledge also the essential role of national parliaments through their enactment of
legislation and adoption of budgets and their role in ensuring accountability for the effective
implementation of our commitments.
1
Quito Communiqué of the IPU, available at http://archive.ipu.org/conf-e/128/quito-comm.htm,
accessed 3 October 2018.
2
Hanoi Declaration of the IPU, available at http://archive.ipu.org/conf-e/132/rpt-gendebate.htm,
accessed 3 October 2018.
3
Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, United Nations, 2015,
Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld, accessed 3
October 2018.
10 The Parliament and the SDGs 225
Our journey will involve Governments as well as Parliaments, the UN system and other
international institutions, local authorities, indigenous peoples, civil society, business and
the private sector, the scientific and academic community – and all people.
The primary responsibility of representing their constituencies, making laws,

approving national budgets and oversight of national policies rests with
Parliamentarians. As a natural corollary, they are uniquely placed to influence the
implementation not only of the national development agenda but also the interna-
tionally agreed SDGs that respect national policies and priorities. Parliamentarians
can thus shape, collectively, as well as individually, the effective implementation of
SDGs with their pivotal roles at the international, national, regional and local levels.
No wonder, therefore, that the UN Declaration on Agenda 2030, in exhorting
Member Nations to conduct regular reviews of the progress of achievement of the
goals at the national and sub-national levels seeks support of the national
Parliaments in this process.
The global Parliamentary institutions have been closely involved in implementa-
tion of SDGs in right earnest. IPU, together with United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), in 2016 developed a Self-assessment Toolkit to assist parlia-
mentarians to assess their preparedness to engage with SDGs and to identify national
strategies, mechanisms and partnerships to implement them effectively.4 Self-
assessment, by definition is a voluntary process. Therefore, the IPU toolkit is a guide
for parliaments to devise their own models. During its first Assembly every year IPU
holds a special session of its Committee on United Nations Affairs to facilitate their
feedback into the United Nations High Level Political Forum (HLPF) that convenes
every July. Also, IPU and UNDP’s Global Parliamentary Report 2017 on parlia-
mentary oversight has provided suggestions for mainstreaming SDGs in parliament.5
The Global Organisation of Parliamentarians Against Corruption (GOPAC), in
collaboration with the UNDP and the Islamic Development Bank (ISD) brought out
a Handbook on Parliament’s Role in Implementing the Sustainable Development
Goals, connecting the primary responsibilities of parliaments with the tools for
effective implementation of SDGs and providing a number of best practices
developed by parliaments, including the Committee on Empowerment of Women in
the Indian parliament.6
While parliamentarians have been involved in shaping the Agenda 2030 and
monitoring the executive’s efforts in its implementation, they also have a key role in
4
IPU, 2016. Parliaments and the Sustainable Development Goals: A Self-Assessment Toolkit.
5
Global Parliamentary Report 2017: Parliamentary oversight: Parliament’s power to hold gov-
ernment to account. 2017, IPU, Chap. 4.3.
6
Parliament’s Role in Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: A Parliamentary
Handbook, UNDP, 2017, p. 40. Also available online at http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/
home/librarypage/democratic-governance/parliamentary_development/parliament-s-role-in-
implementing-the-sustainable-development-go.html, accessed 15 October 2018.
226 A. Kaushik
ensuring not just quantitative achievements and sticking to the agreed indicators at the
international and national levels, but need focussed attention on the quality of
implementation.
2 Convergence and Quality Outcomes: The Role

of the Parliament
SDG targets 16.6 and 16.7 clearly establish the role of parliaments in recognising
the need for effective, accountable and transparent institutions to ensure responsive,
inclusive, participative and representative decisions. With oversight of executive
action as one of their primary responsibilities, parliaments are in a vantage position
to ensure better convergence of the national development goals with SDGs. In fact,
SDGs provide a new opportunity to parliaments in their continuing national
development role: they can benefit from their international interactions and gath-
ering of global best practices and use this knowledge in their practices and pro-
cedures. An account of the International Conferences and specialised meetings on
SDGs attended by the parliamentarians of India is given in the Annexure to this
paper. The interest of the Indian parliamentarians in moulding a strong and effective
set of goals is evident from the fact that two-thirds of these meetings were attended
during the period prior to the finalisation of the SDGs. These meetings were
attended by senior parliamentarians; half of these meetings were attended by del-
egations led by the Speaker of the Lower House of the Parliament. The members of
these delegations participated actively in the proceedings, bringing their own
experiences from their constituencies and house debates into the discourse. The
enthusiasm with which India participated in various IPU and related specialised
meetings/international conferences that discussed various aspects of SDGs,
including convening one such conference in India itself is evidence of the seri-
ousness attached by the Indian representatives to the SDGs.
In addition, India has been quite active in the SDG related interactions held
under the aegis of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) of which it
is a member. Indeed, it hosted a Workshop especially on the energy-related SDGs
on 18–21 January 2016. The table in the next section gives details of CPA meetings
related to SDGs attended by Indian parliamentarians.
A glance at the SDG framework shows that it broadly addresses the same set of
concerns that the parliamentarians work on at the national level. It follows, therefore,
that their first priority in ensuring quality development outcomes on SDGs would be to
‘domesticate’ these goals and reflect them in the national development plans. It will be
the role of parliaments to ensure inclusion of SDGs in their sectoral oversight com-
mittees, to capture and monitor them in their proceedings, and to communicate them to
their constituents to bring them alive to their role in their implementation. This organic
convergence between the goals set in Agenda 2030 and the goals set for national
development enables parliamentarians to contribute to quality outcomes in two ways:

by strengthening the institutions meant to ensure their achievement and by con-
tributing individually and collectively to the quality of outcomes.
There are diverse views on whether parliaments should establish new parlia-
mentary structures such as a dedicated committee on SDGs, or use the resources of
the relevant existing committees such as those on health, education, environment,
infrastructure and finance to mainstream the requisite focus on quality outcomes on
SDGs. Those in favour of the latter view also stress, however, the imperative need
for a better coordination mechanism to monitor overall progress on SDGs. The
richness of SDGs, though, poses a challenge for parliaments to ensure that such
mainstreaming actually happens across the existing structures or thematic com-
mittees in order to hold the government to account effectively.7
The agreed SDG targets and indicators would provide a way forward for moni-
toring quantitative achievement of the goals provided correct, comprehensive and
updated statistical data is available. It is also clear that countries need to have robust
statistical data as well as develop additional indicators and evidence to track progress
and drive outcomes at the national level. OECD has published an elaborate study
involving 98 targets and 131 indicators which measures the distance these countries
need to travel to achieve the SDGs by 2030.8 Many express doubts9 on whether the
‘goal and target’ approach can measure developmental progress, given the lack of
counterfactuals in such enterprises. Be that as it may, quality of outcomes has become
as important a measure of the success of Agenda 2030 as the indicator-based status of
achievements.
Collectively and individually, parliamentarians can weigh into ensure the quality
of outcomes in a number of ways. Firstly, they are in touch with the grassroots and
can provide feedback from the trenches; while indicators may display a happy
percentage of citizens having risen above the poverty line, they could come up with
slums or remote village clusters in their constituencies that belie the generality
depicted by statistics. Secondly, they have the means to check the validity of the
claims of the executive through their committee proceedings by calling witnesses
from all walks of life related to the particular goal or target, giving a veritable rain
check to the policymakers and the statistics departments. Thirdly, they can parse
through achievements in individual goals as exemplified in the relevant committees
to bring coherence among various SDGs by juxtaposing them against the
achievements of other related goals, in view of the inter-connectedness of all SDG
goals. Finally, given that convergence is a sine qua non for quality outcomes,
parliamentarians bring their experiences from the grassroots in their constituencies
and from discussions in the parliamentary committees to the debates in the House,
7
Ibid., p. 74.
8
OECD, June 2017. Measuring Distance to the SDG Targets: An assessment of where OECD
countries stand, available at http://www.oecd.org/sdd/OECD-Measuring-Distance-to-SDG-
Targets.pdf, accessed 9 October 2018.
9
Jon Lunn, Emma Downing and Lorna Booth, September 2015. The Sustainable Development
Goals and the Post-2015 Agenda; Briefing paper no. 7291, House of Commons Library.
228 A. Kaushik
thereby bringing convergence. Many Parliaments have used existing rules and
practices to discuss SDGs comprehensively in the House, as the Indian Lower
House (Lok Sabha) used rule 19310 of its Rules of Procedure.
3 The Indian Parliament: A Stakeholder for Agenda 2030
India has been involved in the evolution of SDGs all along its journey to fruition in
2015. In its approach to the negotiations of SGDs, India laid primary emphasis on
eradicating poverty, including social issues like sanitation and ensuring inclusive
and holistic development that straddles both economic growth and environmental
protection.11 On the occasion of the adoption of the SDGs by the UN in September
2015, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi invoked Deen Dayal Upadhyaya,
whose 100th anniversary fell on the very day of his address, in placing the welfare
of the poorest at the centre of his thoughts.12 India’s active involvement in crafting
the SDGs in tandem with her national goals ensured that much of India’s devel-
opment agenda is mirrored in the SDGs.
The emphasis by India on poverty eradication reverberated in the Declaration13 of
the 4th Conference of the Speakers of Parliaments at New York on 2 September 2015
where it was accepted that poverty eradication was the overarching objective of the
Agenda 2030. The Indian Parliament has been an integral stakeholder in the formu-
lation as well as the implementation of Agenda 2030 since. As mentioned in the
Annexure, Members attended six international conferences in the run-up to Agenda
2030, half of them at the level of the Speaker. Lending their voice was critical to
highlight the fact that 800 million people in 2015 still lived in extreme poverty and 795
million people still suffered from hunger at the conclusion of MDGs. This, despite the
fact that the number of people living in extreme poverty declined by more than half,
falling from 1.9 billion in 1990 to 836 million in 2015. About 14 % of the world’s poor
reside in South Asia. As poverty eradication is the critical SDGs for the South Asian
Region, focus of the Parliament after the coming into force of SDGs has been in the
region: of the six specialised meetings attended, two were of South Asian Speakers,
10
The rules are available at http://164.100.47.194/loksabha/rules.aspx, accessed on 16 October
2018.
11
Sustainable Development Goals: Challenges of Implementation and the Role of Parliament, Lok
Sabha Secretariat, March 2017, pp. 5–6. Available at http://sri.nic.in/sites/default/files/SDGs-
Challenges%20of%20Implementation%20and%20Role%20of%20Parliament.pdf, accessed 18
October 2018.
12
PM’s Statement on 25 September 2015 at the UN Summit for the adoption of Post-2015
Development Agenda. Available at https://www.narendramodi.in/text-of-pm-s-statement-at-the-
united-nations-summit-for-the-adoption-of-post-2015-development-agenda-332923, accessed 3
October 2018.
13
Declaration of the 4th Conference of Speakers of Parliaments, 2015. Available at http://archive.
ipu.org/splz-e/speakers15/declaration.pdf, accessed 3 October 2018.
one of SAARC and two of Asia Pacific region. Beyond the region, Brazil, Russian
Federation, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) members hold meetings of their
Women Parliamentarians Forum on the margins of their annual summits. The Forum
meeting in 2016 was held in Jaipur, India. The theme of the Forum was Women
Parliamentarians: Enablers for Achieving SDGs.
The Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) also organises many
conferences and meetings, of which some are devoted to SDGs. These conferences
and events are attended by legislators not only at the federal level in India but also
at the sub-federal (State) level. Therefore, the regional and local aspects of the
efforts being made in achieving SDGs are duly discussed and factored into the
Indian representation in these events. Table 1 gives the details of such events
attended by the Indian Parliamentarians and provincial legislators.
At the national level, procedures available in the Indian Parliament have been
used by its members to raise issues of importance related to SDGs. The Lok Sabha
held dedicated discussions14 under Rule 193 on 5–12 August 2015, 3 and 5 August
2016, 30 March 2017 and 5 April 2017. More than 50 members contributed to the
discussion, resulting in an incisive debate on SDGs. One member exhorted the
government to focus on 5–6 key goals and inclusivity, while another asked for
leveraging age-old Indian traditions, like sustainable consumption practices, to
achieve them. A leading opposition member asked the government to integrate
SDGs into the annual economic survey, budget and the programmes of each rel-
evant Ministry. A member from the South Indian State of Tamil Nadu elaborated
how that State’s Vision 2023 can become a role model for achieving SDGs at the
national level, while another from an eastern State asked the government to choose
specific targets and districts for developing best practices. One member cautioned
against conflicting programmes so as to ensure convergence across goals, while
another cautioned against ‘defining development down’ by choosing low hanging
fruits. Poverty, health, hunger, education and women empowerment were the
themes of an overwhelming number of interventions.
Members also raised many questions in both Houses on SDGs. In the 16th Lok
Sabha 100 questions related to SDGs were asked, while in the Upper House (Rajya
Sabha) in its sessions 232–248 (July 2014 to February 2019) 9315 such questions were
asked. The questions were on equally well informed issues. Many questions were
raised on the manner in which the government proposes to monitor the achievement of
SDGs. Members kept themselves abreast of global news on SDGs: one set of ques-
tions questioned the government regarding India’s ranking below Comoros and
Ghana and just ahead of Bangladesh and Pakistan in health-related SDGs in a study
14
Debates in the Lower House of Parliament are available at http://164.100.47.194/Loksabha/
Debates/DebateAdvSearch16.aspx, accessed 18 October 2018. Extracts of important interventions
are available at http://sri.nic.in/sites/default/files/Parliamentary%20Initiative%20in%20achieving
%20SDGs.pdf, accessed 18 October 2018.
15
The numbers have been arrived at by using search words ‘Sustainable Development Goals’,
‘SDG’ and ‘SDGs’ on the question search facility on both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha websites.
230
Table 1 SDG related events in CPA attended by Indian Parliamentarians

S. No. Subject Dates Location
1 PAN-Commonwealth Conference of Women Parliamentarians (Agenda included ‘The Role of Women in 25–29 June London, UK
Post-2015 Era’) 2014
2 60th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference (Agenda included ‘Evaluating the Emergent Content of 2–10 October Yaoundé,
Post-2015 Development Agenda’) 2014 Cameroon
3 CPA Parliamentary Agriculture Committee Workshop (Agenda included ‘The Geographical and 29–31 October Chandigarh,
Environmental Challenges to Sustainable Agriculture’) 2014 India
4 Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and UNEP Legislators Expert Workshop on Climate Change 26–28 October London, UK
(Agenda included ‘Climate and Post-2015 Agenda—Seeking Coherence’) 2015
5 The UK-CPA Asian Regional Workshop on Sustainability, Energy and Development (Agenda included 18–20 January New Delhi,
‘Energy, Sustainability and Development’) 2016 India
6 The 27th Commonwealth Parliamentary Seminar (Agenda included ‘The Parliamentarians’ Role in 15–16 June Queensland,
Implementing SDGs’) 2016 Australia
6 6th Westminster Workshop of Parliaments: Financial Oversight of Aid Effectiveness in Houses of 4–7 July 2016 London, UK
Parliament (Agenda included ‘Post-2015 Aid Architecture and Unlocking Data for Sustainable
Development’)
7 62nd Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference (Agenda included ‘The Role of Parliamentarians in 11–17 London, UK
Implementing and Monitoring Policies Relevant to the SDGs’) December
2016
8 63rd Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference (Agenda included ‘SDGs: How can CPA Members work 1–8 November Dhaka,
with their own Governments in ensuring that the SDG goals have a proper gender lens to ensure success in 2017 Bangladesh
the areas of alleviating poverty and women’s empowerment’)
Source Lok Sabha website http://loksabha.nic.in
A. Kaushik
published in Lancet, an acclaimed medical journal. Institutional capacity and suffi-

ciency of data to undertake effective monitoring were also raised in these questions.16
It appears that the parliamentarians in India have immersed SDGs in their ethos
and subsumed them in their events organised around the country. For example,
on 5–6 March 2016, they organised a National Conference of Women Legislators
for federal and provincial women legislators on the theme ‘Women Legislators:
Building Resurgent India’ at the initiative of the Speaker of Lok Sabha. Many
issues of national importance that have a bearing on SDGs were discussed in its
three sessions, including education, health, equality, women empowerment,
financial inclusion, skill development, e-governance and social harmony. The res-
olution adopted at the Conference included a commitment by all women legislators
to proactively engage in the formulation, implementation and monitoring of sus-
tainable development schemes and in particular in meeting targets.17
Again at the Hon’ble Speaker’s initiative, a National Legislators Conference on
the theme ‘We for Development’ with sub-themes: ‘Role of Legislators in the
Development Process’ and ‘Optimum Utilisation of Resources in Development’
was organised on 10–11 March 2018. Legislators from the federal as well as
provincial levels participated and demonstrated in their discussions in four parallel
sessions the concern they have in ensuring that SDG goals targets are brought down
to their constituency level and monitored for both quantitative and qualitative
achievement. Like the Conference two years earlier, this one too adopted a reso-
lution committing them to the task of nation-building, striving to bring in inclusive
and sustainable development. The short and pithy resolution of this Conference
demonstrates the integration of SDGs with national Goals in India.
Box 1: Resolution adopted at the National Legislators Conference, 10–11

March 2018, New Delhi, India
RESOLUTION
‘WE, THE LEGISLATORS, assembled at the National Legislators
Conference on the theme We for Development, held in New Delhi on 10 and
11 March 2018,
do hereby:
Commit ourselves to the task of nationbuilding, and strive to bring in
inclusive and sustainable development, and
16
Questions raised by members in the Lower House are available at http://164.100.47.194/
Loksabha/Questions/Qtextsearch.aspx, and those in the Upper House at http://164.100.47.5/
qsearch/qsearch.aspx, last accessed 20 May 2019.
17
Lok Sabha publication National Conference of Women Legislators, New Delhi, 2016, Ed.
Anoop Mishra, p.132.
232 A. Kaushik
To inform and sensitise citizens about the development programmes,

proactively monitor their implementation, delivery mechanisms and utilisa-
tion of resources,
To encourage people to actively participate in governance issues, develop-
ment policies and programmes, and
Affirm to work tirelessly to create a developed India where no region and
section is left behind’.
Clearly, the Indian legislators have taken their responsibilities towards achieving
SDGs as part of their national and regional development goals seriously.
I. The Indian Parliament: Building Institutional Capacity for Contributing to the
Implementation of Agenda 2030
One challenge faced by parliaments is that discussions and debates in the house are
often, rather mostly, partisan, with treasury and opposition benches attempting to
score political brownie points while discussing any issue. The Speaker of the 16th
Lok Sabha is an eight-time member of parliament, one of the most experienced
veterans in the House. This challenge was also discernible to her over the years as a
member and a minister. She realised that parliamentarians are struggling to straddle
their various roles in their constituency, party and the House, finding it difficult to
devote much time to academic or research-oriented study of subjects of their
interest. She could envisage an exponential rise in productivity of the House if the
grassroots experience and ground realities of the issues faced by their constituents
could be combined with the availability of best in the field expertise to confer with
on issues of interest to the members.
The challenge is higher in developing countries where they do not have much
assistance in terms of personal staff. Even the staff that they do have may not have
the wherewithal to research on their own on the requisite issues; they also have to
deploy them for their administrative and constituency needs as a priority. Staff of
the parliament secretariat posted at the Library, Reference and Research branches is
available to the members for assistance, but they handle queries of almost 800
members with diverse interests.
Parliament of India has an excellent library, with more than 1.4 million docu-
ments including 1,350,000 books and journals acquired on a periodic basis, apart
from online access to 45,000 e-journals from 13,000 publishers worldwide through
J-Gate Informatics. The various Ministries/Departments also regularly provide data
and information desired by the parliament. Thus, the challenge is not access to
information; it is how members can make use of this information overload to
acquire the precise knowledge they need for a given discussion or debate in the
House, or a matter they wish to raise in a committee or with the executive.
Achievement of SDGs is necessarily a bipartisan project, with contribution of
parliamentarians as part of their oversight function in the House an important input.
Parliamentarians need also to ensure quality of implementation through budgetary
and legislative processes as well as the monitoring required at the constituency level
both to get a sense of the inclusiveness of the achievements as well as trigger alarms
where targeted achievements are falling short. Early in her tenure, therefore, the
Indian Speaker Mrs. Sumitra Mahajan felt the need to institutionalise a bipartisan
forum for discussing issues of importance to the nation and envisaged building an
institutional structure to achieve the objective. Thus came into existence an insti-
tutional structure entitled the Speakers Research Initiative18 (SRI).
She discussed the matter with a number of experts over a series of meetings starting
from 6 April 2015.19 It was felt that in order to enable members to have informed
debates in the House on issues of their interest, they need to have access to domain
experts in various areas with whom they could have an informal, non-partisan and
academic interaction on the issues that arise in their constituencies, in their experience
in the House as well as various national and international forums they attend. The
combination of members armed with a real grasp of the realities on the ground in their
respective constituencies and the domain experts with their well-honed academic or
institutional background provides an ideal forum for knowledge sharing that can go a
long way in facilitating informed debates in the House and its committees as well as
enable members to raise critical issues with the optimal precision for the executive to
take note and undertake redress. Thus, came into being the SRI, launched on 23 July
2015 by the Prime Minister of India.20 The first event held by SRI was a workshop on
SDGs. Box 2 below lists the objectives of SRI.
Box 2: Objectives of Speakers Research Initiative

1. Identify major areas/issues of long term, strategic policy significance as
well as of topical importance.
2. Generate High-Quality research inputs and make available latest, critical
knowledge and expertise to members of both the Houses of Parliament for
information dissemination, knowledge sharing and capacity building.
3. Devise interactive, participatory mechanisms for effective knowledge
sharing amongst the members and experts.
SRI has organised21 37 workshops, interactive sessions and multi-stakeholder

dialogues until May 2019, almost half of them on issues relevant for the
implementation of SDGs. Issues such as SDGs and poverty alleviation, agriculture,
organic farming, health, education, water management and draught, stunting and
18
SRI has its own website: see http://sri.nic.in/, last accessed 20 May 2019.
19
Genesis of SRI; Speaker’s Research Initiative, Lok Sabha (2016). http://sri.nic.in/genesis.
20
What is Speaker’s Research Initiative? Lok Sabha (2016). http://sri.nic.in/what-speakers-
research-initiative.
21
Workshop Reports available at Speaker’s Research Initiative of the Lok Sabha (2019).
234 A. Kaushik
wasting in children, and international trade were discussed threadbare by members

with domain experts in this area to arm themselves for an informed debate in the
House. The importance of SRI was duly acknowledged by the President of India Mr
Ram Nath Kovind on the occasion of the third anniversary celebration22 on 24 July
2018, calling it a new chapter in the history of Indian parliamentary democracy,
while the Speaker emphasised the need for super specialisation on issues such as
SDGs and climate change for which SRI is a well-designed institution.
The establishment of SRI as an institutional structure for parliamentarians to
acquire the wherewithal to have informed debates has been appreciated in various
national and international forums such as the Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG) and
many State legislatures including those of the northeastern States of India,
Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and others at the national level and IPU, CPA and
bilateral meetings at the international level. Many States have evinced interest in
establishing similar institutions in their legislative assemblies. On 8 October 2018,
the North-Eastern Chapter of SRI was inaugurated with the participation of legis-
lators from all the eight States of that region and presided over by the Speaker of the
Lok Sabha.23
All members do not have interest in all issues. To cater to specific needs of
members, SRI has constituted seven groups on subjects having a close bearing on
the implementation of SDGs: Agriculture, Health, Education, Environment and
Climate Change, Women and Child Development, Finance, and Infrastructure and
Housing.24 With the operationalisation of SRI, the Indian Parliament has thus
created an institution within its remit that obviates the need for a special committee
on SDGs while at the same time giving an opportunity to its members to discuss
SDGs threadbare with experts and hone their skills at working within and without
the parliament to contribute their mite to the effective implementation of SDGs.
4 The Indian Parliamentarian: Convergence of National

Development Goals and SDGs
The debate on SDGs in the Lok Sabha has demonstrated the close link between
national development goals and SDGs. When introducing the debate on 30 March
2017, the Speaker briefed the members about the business advisory committee of
the Lok Sabha wanting to undertake a discussion on SDGs to determine what the
members could do, including in their constituencies, to take forward the resolve to
achieve the SDGs and exhorted them to discuss the issue in a non-partisan manner.
22
SRI Anniversary Report available at the Speaker’s Research Initiative of the Lok Sabha (2018).
23
Inauguration of the North East Chapter of the Speaker’s Research Initiative, Lok Sabha (2018).
http://sri.nic.in/inauguration-north-east-chapter-speakers-research-initiative-sri-08th-october-2018.
24
SRI Groups; Speaker’s Research Initiative, Lok Sabha (2018). http://sri.nic.in/sites/default/files/
SRI%20Groups%20%28Members%20of%20Parliament%29_0.pdf.
She recalled the discussions held in SRI workshops and asked them to proffer
constructive criticism as well as suggestions on the matter. The member who then
launched the discussion stated that Goal 3—Health for All—is a prerequisite for
achieving the other goals. That set the tone for a wholesome discussion.
Members who participated in the discussions made liberal references to various
schemes and programmes of the government in demonstrating their commitment to
the implementation of SDGs. Many members laid emphasis on eradication of
poverty, food security, education, improved nutrition, renewable and clean energy,
sustainable agriculture and sustainable cities. Building partnership between the
developed and the developing countries was also raised. There was wide reference
to schemes like PM’s Ujjawla Scheme (provision of cooking gas to wean the poor
away from using cow-dung, wood and coal in cooking), Jan Dhan Yojana (easy
access to bank accounts), Swachh Bharat Yojana (a cleanliness drive, including
building of toilets), Sabka Sath Sabka Vikas (collective efforts, inclusive growth),
National Nutrition Mission, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (save a girl child, educate a
girl child), Rashtriya Mahila Kosh (provision of microcredit to self help groups of
women entrepreneurs), etc. There was a demand for increasing public investment in
social sectors which are crucial for achieving SDGs.
A young member, Mr. Anurag Singh Thakur, informed how the young MPs
constituted a group and ran an awareness campaign on malnutrition in the 14th and
15th (the two previous) Lok Sabhas. Celebrities and MPs joined hands to organise a
cricket match to spread such awareness. Explaining the role of MPs in taking
measures to the grassroots, he took the examples of distribution of health cards and
DDT spray under the National Rural Health Mission and asked how many MPs ask,
in the DISHA25 meetings and otherwise, whether the cards are being used or the
spraying is actually happening in the villages in their constituencies. Another MP,
Mr Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, referred to the Delhi Declaration signed by the
Health Secretaries of all States to work collaboratively towards achievement of
SDG Goal 3, resulting in India being on the verge of achieving target 3.2 regarding
reducing neonatal mortality to 12 per 1000 live births and under-five mortality to 25
per 1000 live births. Another MP Ms. Bhawana Gawali (Patil), bemoaned that
despite these efforts, India was 178th among 184 countries in terms of GDP share
being spent on health care. She suggested involving the private sector in healthcare
through models such as PPP (Public–Private-Partnerships), BOT (Build-Own-
Transfer) and telemedicine.
As mentioned earlier, work in the committees of the parliament is another
indicator of the convergence between national policies and SDGs. For example, the
Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family
Welfare in its 103rd and 106th Reports laid in the Parliament on 20 December 2017
and 8 March 2018 respectively laid emphasis on achieving SDGs on health in
25
District Development, Coordination and Monitoring Committee, a Central Government pro-
gramme launched in July 2016, which has regular meetings chaired by a senior MP to enable MPs,
MLAs and district level officials to take stock of all rural development schemes. http://pib.nic.in/
newsite/mbErel.aspx?relid=147922, accessed 26 October 2018.
236 A. Kaushik
connection with HIV AIDS and tuberculosis by referring specifically to the related
SDG targets and indicators.
At the constituency level, members of parliament and State legislators invest
efforts and public funds in schemes and programmes that are specifically relevant to
their constituencies and thus majorly contribute to the implementation of SDGs.
Under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme26 (MPLADS),
each member gets an allocation of INR 50 million per annum for various eligible
expenses for the development of her/his constituency. Similarly, the Members of
Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) also get substantial funds, which vary from State to
State, for such activities. The guidelines for utilisation of these schemes are such
that they enable MPs and MLAs to contribute to national and State development
schemes and programmes. Of the INR 28.87 billion spent under MPLADS on
various central sector schemes, an overwhelming majority27 was spent on schemes
related to infrastructure, education, drinking water, electricity, non-conventional
energy, sanitation and public health, health and family welfare and irrigation, issues
that are also contributing to achievement of SDGs. Discussing these schemes and
their implementation in the DISHA meetings gives them an opportunity to forge
convergence between SDGs and national development goals.
5 The Way Forward
Being representatives of the people of their countries and having access to both
national and international discussions on issues of importance, Parliamentarians are
uniquely placed to contribute to the achievement of SDGs. Their responsibility of
oversight of executive action coupled with their grassroots experience from their
constituencies and feedback from the people enables them to monitor not only the
quantitative but also the qualitative achievement of these goals. These attributes
make them critical stakeholders for SDGs and Agenda 2030 at the national level.
The Indian parliamentarians have been taking many steps to fulfil their duties as
such a stakeholder, as enumerated in this chapter. With almost three years of the
fifteen-year period for implementation of Agenda 2030 behind us, all stakeholders
have a responsibility to monitor progress and take steps for any necessary course
correction, to leverage the remaining years, to ensure full implementation of the
Agenda. Since parliaments have been associated with the crafting of these goals
from the time of their formulation, they have to have a sense of ownership of these
goals. National level indicators, developed in consonance, and sometimes in
26
Guidelines on Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (2018). https://mplads.
gov.in/MPLADS/UploadedFiles/MPLADSGuidelines2016English_638.pdf, accessed 21 October
2018.
27
State-wise Summary of Work Details, Members of Parliament Local Area Development
Scheme (2019). https://www.mplads.gov.in/mplads/AuthenticatedPages/Reports/Citizen/rptCMS
StateWiseSummaryOfWork.aspx, accessed 20 May 2019.
addition to, the internationally agreed indicators are an important means to assess
achievement. Parliaments, with the assistance of the IPU-UNDP Self-Assessment
Toolkit or measures developed independently and in-house, can provide a robust
assessment of the level and achievement. The feedback mechanism available to
them from their constituents as well as in the various committees of their parlia-
ments and the international events they attend also make them pivotal in the
qualitative assessment of achievement of the goals. Thus, parliamentarians can be
veritable lodestars for Agenda 2030.
Annexure: International Conferences and Specialised

Meetings on SDGs Attended by the Indian
Parliamentarians
Sl. Subject Date Location

No.
1 MDGs Acceleration and Post-2015 Agenda 12–13 Surabaya, East
November 2014 Java, Indonesia
2 Second Meeting of the Preparatory Committee of 17–18 New York,
the Fourth World Conference of Speakers of November 2014 USA
Parliaments (Agenda included Lessons from the
MDGs and Future Post-2015 Development
Agenda)
3 Global Parliamentary Conference of the 12–13 April Washington
Parliamentary Network of the World Bank and 2015 DC, USA
IMF (Agenda included (i) Financing for
Development and Attaining Sustainable
Development, (ii) Improving Healthcare Systems
and Emergent Responses, and (iii) Gender Equality
and Women’s Rights in the Post-2015 Agenda)
4 Third Meeting of the Preparatory Committee of the 1–2 June 2015 Geneva,
Fourth World Conference of Speakers of Switzerland
Parliaments (Presiding Officers discussed
inter-connections between the Speakers
Conference and the UN Summit on SDGs)
5 Standing Committee of the Asian Parliamentary 19–20 August Jakarta,
Association (Agenda included (i) Linking 2015 Indonesia
Economic growth to SDGs for Peace and
Prosperity, and (ii) SDGs: Time to Take Action)
6 Tenth Meeting of Women Speakers of Parliament 29 August to 2 New York,
and Fourth World Conference of Speakers of September 2015 USA
Parliaments (Agenda included (i) Placing
Democracy at the Service of Peace and Sustainable
Development, and (ii) Translating SDGs into
Action etc.)
7 South Asian Speakers Summit on Achieving SDGs 30–31 January Dhaka,
2016 Bangladesh
8 First SAARC Young Parliamentarians Conference 16–18 August Islamabad,
on Peace and Harmony for Development (Agenda 2016 Pakistan
(continued)
238 A. Kaushik
(continued)
Sl. Subject Date Location
No.
included SAARC SDGs: Tackling Inequality to
Encourage Emancipation)
9 Eighteenth General Assembly of the Asia-Pacific 10–12 Seoul, South
Parliamentary Conference on Environment and November 2016 Korea
Development (Theme: UN SDGs and International
Development)
10 South Asian Speakers Summit on Achieving the 18–20 February Indore, India
SDGs (Theme: Strengthening Regional 2017
Cooperation and Resources for the SDGs)
11 Regional Seminar on SDGs for the Parliaments in 11–13 May Ho Chi Minh
the Asia-Pacific Region 2017 City, Vietnam
12 World Parliamentary Forum on Sustainable 5–7 September Nusa Dua, Bali,
Development (Theme: Achieving the 2030 Agenda 2017 Indonesia
through Inclusive Development)
Chapter 11
Role of NITI Aayog
in the Implementation of the 2030
Agenda
Ashok Kumar Jain and Sundar Narayan Mishra
Abstract The NITI Aayog—National Institution for Transforming India—is the

Think Tank of the Government of India, which has the responsibility of overseeing
implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in the country.
NITI Aayog’s role in the context of the SDGs naturally gels well with its overall
mandate of providing policy guidance, monitoring programme implementation and
strengthening innovation across varied development sectors. While India’s federal
context ordains that States and Union Territories (UTs) are predominantly
responsible for implementation of SDGs, NITI Aayog has made significant con-
tribution to the pursuit of SDGs by sensitising different stakeholders, regularly
reviewing progress, providing need-based technical support, facilitating mutual
learning among States/UTs and ranking the performance of States/UTs on SDGs on
a set of select indicators. It has played a critical role in bringing together diverse
stakeholders and setting off collaboration among them for specific objectives. The
chapter projects future directions based on an analysis of current status and pre-
paredness of relevant stakeholders, more specifically the State governments. It also
gives key details of how the questions of monitoring, indicators and data have been
addressed as far as SDGs are concerned.

Keywords NITI Aayog Monitoring and evaluation SDG India index
Voluntary National Review
A. K. Jain (&)
Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Telangana and Former Adviser
(SDGs), NITI Aayog, New Delhi, India
e-mail: jainifs@rediffmail.com
S. N. Mishra
Consultant (SDGs), NITI Aayog, New Delhi, India

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_11
240 A. K. Jain and S. N. Mishra
1 Introduction
The National Institution for Transforming India, also called NITI Aayog, is the
premier policy ‘Think Tank’ of the Government of India, providing both directional
and policy inputs. It was formed by means of a resolution of the Union Cabinet of
the Government of India on 1st January 2015 and took the place of the erstwhile
Planning Commission, which was instituted way back in 1950.
While designing strategic and long-term policies and programmes for the
Government of India, NITI Aayog also provides relevant technical advice to the
Centre and States. It makes regular interventions to facilitate entrepreneurship,
innovation and new-age leadership on various development fronts. A prominent
part of its role, and arguably the principal aspect of its raison d’être, is to articulate
the national development agenda and work as an integrative platform of the
Government of India to bring the States and Union Territories (UTs) to act together
in pursuance of the national agenda.
1.1 SDGs and the Mandate of NITI Aayog
The Prime Minister of India, in his address at the United Nations Sustainable
Development Summit in September 2015 hailed the relevance and appositeness of
the 2030 Agenda for India’s development and observed that much of India’s
development agenda is mirrored in Sustainable Development Goals.1 He drew
parallels between the crucial commitments as enunciated in SDGs and India’s
development priorities and underlined India’s pursuit of elimination of poverty,
environmentally sound economic growth, industrialisation and infrastructure
development, empowerment of women and reduction of inequality. As India
implements a vast array of development programmes, they inter alia address all the
SDGs.
NITI Aayog is uniquely positioned to promote and facilitate implementation of
the multi-sectoral and poly-dimensional development agenda in coordination with
Central Ministries, State Governments and other stakeholders. According to the
Allocation of Business Rules of the Government of India, NITI Aayog has the
mandate to evolve and monitor vision and strategies for national development in
collaboration with State Governments, facilitate partnerships among relevant
stakeholders and support inclusive development.2 Therefore, it is befitting that NITI
Aayog has been entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing implementation of
SDGs in the country.
1
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s speech is available at https://www.narendramodi.in/pm-modi-
addresses-world-sustainable-development-summit-538963 accessed on 28.11.2019.
2
Sub-clauses 1 (ii) a, e, f & k of the Allocation of Business Rules (accessed on 28.11.2018 at http://
niti.gov.in/content/allocation-business-rules-0) read together.
11 Role of NITI Aayog in the Implementation of the 2030 Agenda 241
2 The SDG Ecosystem
Given its vastness and complexity, India has a multi-layered and diverse gover-
nance system. While the federal political system acknowledges the primacy of the
Union Government, the State Governments at the provincial level are partners in
development and governance with the authority of independent decision-making in
a number of areas. Local Governments, both urban and rural, have constitutionally
mandated powers and functions as well as entitlement to fiscal resources. The focus
on State and Local Governments is also in keeping with the instrumentality sug-
gested in two targets under SDG 16, which highlight the institutional prerequisites
for successful implementation of SDGs:
• 16.6 Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels
• 16.7 Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-
making at all levels.
On the other hand, India also has well-evolved economic, social and environ-
mental development programme domains managed by Central Ministries in coor-
dination with State Government Departments as well as other agencies. The country
has a vibrant civil society with country-wide spread and robust links with local
communities. There is a grown-up private sector with considerable financial pro-
wess, knowledge and innovation base and fair clout at national and international
levels. Therefore, implementation of SDGs needs to be taken forward across this
ecosystem with involvement of all stakeholders at different levels.
2.1 Alignment of Development Programmes

and Implementation
India’s development agenda is mainly carried forward through a whole array of

development programmes and schemes, which are managed by the Central
Government Ministries in partnership with State Governments. Right after the
SDGs coming into force, NITI Aayog carried out a detailed mapping of the 17
Goals on Nodal Central Ministries, Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSSs) and other
government initiatives and also of each of the 169 targets on concerned Central
Ministries. It was later made more detailed covering almost all programmes and
schemes implemented by the Government of India fully accounting for intercon-
nectedness across SDGs/targets (LeBlanc 2015; Nilsson et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2018)
and effectively placing the entire programme implementation system in an SDG
matrix.3
3
The revised mapping document is available on NITI Aayog’s website at http://niti.gov.in/
writereaddata/files/SDGMapping-Document-NITI_0.pdf accessed on 15.02.2019.
Apart from the programmes and schemes, the initiative has also attempted to
place the functioning of the Ministries/Departments concerned in the compass of
the SDGs/targets, which paves the way for more comprehensive and focused
implementation of SDGs going forward. Guided by this effort of NITI Aayog, all
State Governments have mapped out their own departments as well as schemes/
programmes according to SDGs/targets, simultaneously also factoring in their own
priorities. The UTs have also begun to do so.
2.2 Sensitisation and Awareness Development
The vast spectrum of the SDGs and the associated 169 targets make up an elaborate
and fairly sophisticated framework. Development issues staring us in the face are
often very knotty and development practice over the decades has opened up
umpteen new strategic aspects which call for urgent attention. The SDGs, in fact,
constitute a timely and robust attempt to capture the complexity and practical
implications for action in a rather lucid framework. Moreover, by bringing together
and integrating economic, social and environmental issues and concerns, SDGs
have tried to resolve the intersectoral contradictions and strengthen the roots of
sustainable development. However, fact remains that the SDGs present hitherto the
most comprehensive framework, which needs to be clearly understood by all
stakeholders involved in implementation. Further, effectiveness in policy coherence
in implementation of SDGs requires that government officials at different levels
develop the awareness and knowhow to design and manage appropriate imple-
mentation strategies and adequately engage other stakeholders (Saner and Michalun
2009).
Therefore, NITI Aayog, in partnership with the United Nations and other
knowledge partners, initiated sensitisation and awareness building right from the
inception. It has conducted a series of national and subnational consultations4 on
SDGs and their implementation strategies involving Central Ministries, State
Governments, local governments, civil society organisations, academia, think tanks,
international organisations and other stakeholders. It has also conducted subnational
consultations involving States and local stakeholders to deal more directly with
issues on the ground. These consultations covered various SDGs, strategies for their
implementation and scope of institutional partnerships and collaborations.
The sensitisation and awareness building process involved a range of stake-
holders5 participating with varied perspectives, interests and objectives. It was a
4
Information on the consultations are available on NITI Aayog’s website at http://niti.gov.in/
content/national-and-regional-consultations as accessed on 15.02.2019.
5
The multi-stakeholder approach adopted by NITI Aayog is a central part of its strategy, which
informs much of its work. The significance of this approach has been underlined by efforts around
the world (Stern et al. 2015; Stafford-Smith et al. 2017; Treichel et al. 2017) and emphasised in the
UNESCAP guidelines on multi-stakeholder partnership (UNU-IAS and UN 2018).
productive engagement which brought forth a host of positive results and learning.
In the course of 24 national and subnational consultations, a large number of
stakeholder representatives participated. It brought together experiences and
learning of different States and UTs which are socioeconomically and culturally
diverse, and juxtaposed different strategies adopted for implementing programmes.
It brought into full display the federal style of functioning in India and the rich
leadership, creativity and innovations demonstrated by the States and UTs. The
divergence in the status of performance and varied pace of progress did not dampen
the avidity of learning interactions.
3 Monitoring and Data
With 17 Goals, 169 targets and 232 indicators (excluding the repetitive ones), the
2030 Agenda offers a lot of challenges in terms of monitoring and measuring
progress. The challenge becomes more formidable for countries like India with vast
geographical, economic, demographic and social diversity. India has taken signif-
icant strides by developing a National SDG Indicator framework (NIF) with over
300 Indicators6 and a coordinated system for generating and managing data through
a process of multi-layered and iterative consultations involving federal ministries,
subnational governments, research institutions, UN and other international organ-
isations as well as civil society.
The process of developing the NIF was led by the Ministry of Statistics and
Programme Implementation with facilitation support from NITI Aayog, the four
working groups of which held intensive discussions with various ministries to
develop the national indicators. The consultative process also led to State
Governments developing additional indicators for State-level monitoring and
tracking of progress. Thus, multi-level and customised tracking of progress at
various programmatic and operational levels is being enabled to keep the imple-
mentation of SDGs fairly focused and results-driven.
3.1 SDG India Index and Baseline
In order to fast-track monitoring of progress on the 2030 Agenda, NITI Aayog has
taken the lead in developing the SDG India index in 2018 (NITI Aayog 2018b),7
which comprehensively documents and measures the progress made by the
6
The National SDG Indicator Framework is available on the website of the Ministry of Statistics
and Programme Implementation, Government of India at http://www.mospi.gov.in/national-
indicator-framework accessed on 15.02.2019.
7
The report is based on indicators identified consultatively with Central Ministries as well as State
Governments and UTs by NITI Aayog.
subnational governments (States and UTs) on various SDG targets by ranking them
on key SDG indicators. This index accomplishes the dual task of tracking progress
on the national development agenda as aligned to SDGs and measuring progress of
subnational governments in a comparative perspective. This also constitutes the first
holistic strategy to measure progress on socioeconomic and environmental
parameters of development of a large and diverse economy and society such as
India’s. Providing the first baseline report on SDGs in the country, the SDG India
Index enables the subnational governments to benchmark their progress relative to
others, and identify priority areas, while promoting healthy competition among
them on the trajectory to 2030.
The objective of constructing the SDG India Index is to devise, popularise and
adopt a quick and cross-cutting tool to measure performance at subnational level
(States and UTs) towards achieving the SDGs severally and cumulatively.
Performance is computed and shown as the distance traversed towards SDG targets
on various SDG parameters integrating economic, social and environmental
dimensions. It also aims to stimulate performance by promoting healthy competi-
tion and emulation among States and UTs within the framework of cooperative
federalism in India. This initiative targets and impacts all 36 State Governments and
UT Administrations covering whole of the country. NITI Aayog, the Ministry of
Statistics and Programme Implementation and other ministries of Government of
India, Governments of States and UTs and UN in India consultatively selected 62
SDG Indicators on which performance is computed and ranked. Ministries of
Government of India and subnational governments provide data and participate in
the rating and ranking exercise.
Every State and UT as well as the country as a while has been ranked on each of
the SDGs and on all SDGs compositely. Each indicator has been evenly weighted
in keeping with the international practice of giving equal importance to all the
SDGs. Score on each SDG has been calculated as distance covered in terms of
achievement from 0 to 100; 0 being the starting point and 100 the maximum the
Goal sets out to achieve.
The innovativeness of the initiative mainly has to do with the participatory
identification of the indicators and construction of the SDG Index, the fusion of
indicators on outcomes and performance in major on-going development pro-
grammes, and transparent real-time display of results. It is transformative in its
impact because it instils outcome-orientation in the measurement of performance,
brings to the fore the social and environmental dimensions of development, and
seeks to topple the business-as-usual approach.
The Index has thrown some surprises primarily due to commingling of social,
economic and environmental dimensions. Many subnational governments with
higher NSDP per capita have slid down in the performance ranking. The richest
State of Goa came 5th on the composite index. States such as the northern hill State
of Himachal Pradesh and Kerala have done remarkably well due to their better
achievements on aspects of Human Development. Small North Eastern States have

also attained prominence on account of similar reasons.
The cues from the Index will bring about rethinking and rejigging in programme
strategies, implementation and monitoring processes at the subnational level. As
envisaged, the competitive ethos among the State and Union Territory Governments
is being reinforced. It has also foregrounded the 2030 Agenda and promoted its
mainstreaming across various development sectors.
3.2 The SDG India Dashboard
A national SDG dashboard is being developed by the Ministry of Statistics and

Programme Implementation in collaboration with the United Nations and NITI
Aayog. The objective is to create an integrated web-based data portal on the status
of SDGs in the country with inputs from Central Ministries and State Governments.
The dashboard is going to be a versatile one with multifarious objectives addressed
simultaneously. First, it is designed in such a manner that it will arouse and retain
the interest of the reader and inform her adequately about SDGs in an interactive
manner. Second, it will display updated status of performance at national and
States/UT level in a disaggregated manner—on all SDGs compositely, on each
SDG as well as each individual target. Third, it will also provide the reader with
information on on-going performance of programmes/schemes mapped unto
specific SDGs. At the time of going to press, the dashboard was at the final stages of
preparation to go live.
4 Support to Subnational Governments
The commitment of the Government of India to achieving the Sustainable

Development Goals can be realised by not only action at the national level, but also
initiatives of the State Governments and UT administrations. It is so because of the
federal governance structure of India. The powers and functions are allocated to the
Centre and States in such a manner that most of the functions that are significant for
SDGs figure in the Concurrent or States List in the VII Schedule of the
Constitution. Therefore, the State governments are vested with the key responsi-
bility for achieving SDGs and are critical stakeholders in the implementation of the
Sustainable Development Agenda 2030.
India’s vast socioeconomic and cultural diversity as well as inter-State disparities
make the SDGs’ penchant for inclusiveness, equality and justice more challenging.
This further accentuates the importance of the initiatives of States/UTs for the
Fig. 1 NITI Aayog working

with States/UTs on SDGs Sensitisation &
awareness
development
Rating & Ranking Regular updates

of Performance States and review
& UTs
Interactive
platform for
learning and Technical support
emulation
achievement of SDGs at the national level, which has also been the experience in
other countries (Kanuri et al. 2016; Coopman et al. 2016). The variation in the Net
State Domestic Products across different States is up to as much as about 10 times.8
Similarly, the variation in literacy rate is from about 62 to 94 %. On the other hand,
there are wide divergences in socioeconomic status within States across different
social and population groups. Such variations mean that overall economic status of
a State may not give the accurate picture of reality across all areas of the State. This
calls for a differentiated and customised approach to development planning,
implementation and monitoring at the subnational level in view of diverse social,
economic, and environmental factors and concerns. The same logic would also
apply to implementation of SDGs.
States have started playing a bigger role in the country’s progress. Special efforts
have also been made to strengthen the governance system of the country through
promotion of cooperative and competitive federalism. For example, the recom-
mendations coming from the Sub-Groups of Chief Ministers of States on several
thematic areas including the Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, skill development, etc. have
made substantive contributions towards formulation of relevant policy decisions at
the national-level.
From the outset, as a part of its mandate of cooperative federalism, NITI Aayog
has been promoting the role of States and UTs in implementation of SDGs.
Figure 1 visualises various components of this enabling strategy adopted by NITI
Aayog towards the States and UTs.
8
The Net State Domestic Product of Goa at current prices for the year 2015–16 was a little more
than 10 times that of Bihar according to data compiled by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation accessed on 28.11.2018 at www.mospi.gov.in/sites/default/…statements/
StatewiseDomesticProduct_29aug18.xls.
The aspect of sensitisation and awareness generation is discussed above. Also

discussed is the process of rating and ranking of performance of the States/UTs,
which has substantial catalytic effect on the motivation and efforts by States/UTs to
pursue the SDGs. Regular (i.e. biannual) reporting and review of progress on SDGs
is not merely a routine monitoring activity. It is conducted in small groups of 6–7
States/UTs at one go. Every State gets to share its initiatives, results and good
practices, which are interrogated and analysed in the group. Each State/UT gets
feedback and also provides feedback to others. The exercise involves fair amount of
peer learning in an interactive context. This process offers a national platform for
regular interaction among the States, UTs and NITI Aayog and provides recogni-
tion for good work as well as inputs for improvement. It also reinforces a com-
petitive ethos among the participant States/UTs. It also gives every State/UT the
opportunity to highlight problems and issues it faces, seek solution and any other
support it may require from the national level.
5 Voluntary National Review (VNR)
As a signatory to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, India is com-

mitted to participate in the international review of progress of SDGs on a regular
basis. India enthusiastically supports the process of international follow-up and
review of the 2030 Agenda at the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF), which meets
annually under the auspices of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
India presented its 1st Voluntary National Review Report (NITI Aayog 2017)9
on implementation of SDGs on 19th July 2017 in the HLPF at United Nations, New
York. The VNR report was based on an analysis of progress under various relevant
programmes and initiatives in the country. As per the decision of the HLPF, the
VNR report focused on 7 SDGs: SDGs 1 (No Poverty); 2 (Zero Hunger); 3 (Good
Health and Well-Being); 5 (Gender Equality); 9 (Industry, Innovation and
Infrastructure); 14 (Life Below Water) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).
5.1 VNR Process and Features
As a part of its oversight responsibility, NITI Aayog led the process of VNR
preparation. A multi-disciplinary VNR Task Force was constituted with members
from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Think Tanks and
NITI Aayog to coordinate the review and process documentation. From the sub-
national level, State governments and UT administrations reported on their
9
India’s Voluntary National Review Report on implementation of SDGs is also available on NITI
Aayog’s website at http://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Final_VNR_report.pdf.
perspectives and progress on the various programmes and initiatives. NITI Aayog’s
series of consultations at the national as well as subnational levels, in which State
governments, local governments, Civil Society Organisations, technical experts,
academics, international organisations and other stakeholders participated, gener-
ated relevant information and inputs. The VNR Task Force reviewed information
collected from different sources, deliberated upon it and analysed and covered it
extensively in this report.
India benefited from participating in preparatory workshops conducted by the
UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs at the global and regional levels
(Expert Group Meeting and the Regional VNR Workshop). These workshops threw
light on experiences and initiatives of countries that presented VNRs in 2016 as
well as those preparing the reports for the HLPF 2017. India’s participation in the
UNESCAP meeting on VNR, the 4th session of the Asia Pacific Forum on
Sustainable Development, 73rd session of the UNESCAP and the 20th session of
the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development were also useful
for generating information from various countries on institutional systems put in
place, strategies and programmes implemented and emerging good practices.
For this review, all available information on relevant aspects of the identified
SDGs and related targets were taken into consideration. Authenticated government
data was used, much of which came from the programme implementation
databases.
6 The Push for Localisation of SDGs
Localisation of SDGs is—to put it simply—the process of understanding, adapta-

tion, planning, implementing and monitoring the SDGs from subnational to local
levels by relevant institutions. Thus, it begins with defining the national/subnational
context of the 2030 agenda, and moving forward to setting goals and targets at
national and subnational contexts, working out indicators and monitoring frame-
work from subnational to local levels and identifying/establishing the means and
structures of implementation. In terms of engagement and collaboration of insti-
tutions, it would be consequential how the Union, State and Local Governments
work together to achieve the SDGs at the national level, and how SDGs can provide
a framework for subnational and local policy, planning and action for realisation of
SDG targets at local levels (UN Development Group 2014; Lucci 2015; GTF,
UNDP and UN-Habitat 2016).
NITI Aayog is coordinating the progress on the path of localisation right from
the start of its initiative of mapping of ministries, departments and programmes.
Through its series of national and subnational consultation, it has sensitised the
whole gamut of stakeholders on context-specific strategies on SDG targets. It has
unfurled the national development strategy10 and 3-year Action Agenda11 which
inter alia address all SDGs and guide development policy and action in the country.
While 17 States/UTs have already prepared12 their Vision/Action Plan 2030 doc-
uments in the light of their development priorities, others are at various stages of
doing so. Assam was the first to adopt the ‘Vision Assam 2030’. Andhra Pradesh
quickly followed suit with its Vision 2029 (GoAP 2017).
At the national level, NITI Aayog oversees the implementation of SDGs, while
all States and UTs have assigned this responsibility to their Planning Departments
or their equivalent entities. All States/UTs have put in place special centres/units/
teams to coordinate SDG matters, whereas many of them have specified coordi-
nation points within each department/agency. Several States have identified district
level structures (i.e. District Planning Committee/Unit, district level coordination
committee or SDG cell) for collection of data, coordination and related activities. In
several States, the Chief Minister or Chief Secretary is part of high-level monitoring
committees. It is widely recognised that silos across sectors and departments need
to be breached, advanced IT tools used and local governments involved in the
process. Panchayati Raj Institutions (rural local governments), particularly the
Gram Panchayats are very active in orienting the local planning and implementation
process to SDGs.
States/UTs have adopted the National SDG Indicator Framework and many of
them have also identified a set of indicators for monitoring at State/Sub-State levels.
Some of the States are going ahead to set up their own State SDG dashboards
besides being willing to work with the national dashboard by providing data and
other contents. These processes and mechanisms of monitoring and reporting are
expected to drive the planning and implementation process right from local up to
the national level in a coherent manner.
The process of localisation of SDGs is long and continuous. A lot remains to be
done at all levels. The initiatives discussed above are being taken forward. Capacity
development has been a concomitant component, which NITI Aayog is coordi-
nating and ministries, States/UTs are implementing. Going forward, capacity
development will be deepened and specialised at all levels. Improving financing of
SDGs is an area on which work has begun and will become detailed in near future.
Integrated programme implementation addressing the interconnectedness of SDGs
will be further deepened. Monitoring and data management will be progressively
more fine-tuned. While all these works are in progress, it is clear that localisation of
SDGs has taken root and diversifying.
10
The Strategy for New India@75” details pathways for sustainable growth and provides mile-
stones for the year 2022 (NITI Aayog 2018a).
11
The Three Year Action Agenda provided concrete action perspectives for the period 2017–2020
(NITI Aayog 2017).
12
The SDG India Index: Baseline Report 2018 provides an update of States’ initiatives in this
respect (NITI Aayog 2018b).
7 Way Forward
By the force of intent and strategic versatility, the SDGs are expected to bring about
a disruptive and transformative impact on the development implementation process
as well as the outcomes. Beyond the comfort zone of a ‘business-as-usual’
approach, new strategies, institutional mechanisms and partnerships are necessary
to yield the desired results. Over the last three years, earnest efforts have been made
to etch out such a new trajectory by different stakeholders including the govern-
ment. NITI Aayog will continue to play the role of a catalyst, facilitator and enabler
to ensure that the implementation process moves on a fast track to bring the SDGs
into fruition. In light of the initiatives taken so far and learning from its experiences,
there is a need to work on several pathways.
7.1 Strengthening the States’ Effectiveness on SDGs
With the support of NITI Aayog and their own initiatives, States and UTs have
made considerable progress.13 There are several areas where States can be aided in
improving their effectiveness with regard to implementation of SDGs and NITI
Aayog is well-positioned to extend such support.
7.2 Setting Directions
Quite a number of States have prepared their vision documents focused on the
SDGs to guide their development programmes and other initiatives. Several States
have also completed their SDG action plans. Such envisioning process is very
welcome and provides a unique opportunity to unleash creativity and enterprise to
draw unorthodox roadmaps for future. This opportunity has already been used well
by several States. For example, the Vision 2029 of the Government of Andhra
Pradesh aims at transforming the State into ‘A happy and globally competitive
society’ by 2029 (GoAP 2017). Haryana’s vision inter alia highlighted the need for
creating jobs, developing industries and building up sustainable infrastructure in the
State (GoH 2017). From the national level, the process of State level envisioning
can be supported as follows.
• Developing an analytical big picture out of the country-wide envisioning can
yield insights with respect to different strategies deployed to address common
13
Apart from ranking the performance of States and UTs, the SDG India Index: Baseline Report
2018 (NITI Aayog 2018b) provides an analysis of progress made by States and UTs of India.
problems, provide eclectic resources for devising policy instruments to address

specific objectives and identify areas of synergy among States and between State
(s) and the centre.
• Opportunities to address regional issues and disparities can emerge from
understanding of priorities and future paths being envisaged by adjacent States.
• Cross-State collaborative initiatives can be visualised and promoted by the
centre if States concerned are facilitated to arrive at consensual action areas.
• Broader partnerships can be stitched together involving States/UTs and other
stakeholders (i.e. researchers, civil society, private sector businesses, etc.)
depending on issues taken up for action.
There is a need for institutional capacity development of States and UTs in order
to strengthen their implementation process. The following areas of capacity
development will be important to address.
7.3 Innovating Implementation Designs
The SDGs have successfully highlighted the need for multi-thematic and
inter-sectoral programming and implementation. However, integrated planning and
implementation are challenging as silo-based functioning and decision-making is
still widely in practice among government departments and agencies. There is a
need for evolving model strategies and practices for demonstration and replication.
NITI Aayog can play a very vital role in this direction:
• In collaboration with interested States, implementation designs can be devel-
oped and piloted in identified districts. The Aspirational District Programme of
the NITI Aayog can provide the appropriate and fertile context for such
initiatives.
• Targeted capacity development interventions can enable relevant officials/
functionaries to ensure that implementation takes off in the right direction. These
capacity development measures would also need to embed attitude and beha-
viour change modules for the government officials/functionaries concerned.
• The contours of social exclusion and marginalisation are dissimilar across
States/UTs. Experience tells us that inclusive strategies cannot automatically
come just by revising guidelines and procedures. Strategic measures will need to
be accompanied by sensitive and motivated implementation which is informed
of local problems, issues and sociocultural contexts.
7.4 Resource Mobilisation for SDGs
Quite a few States (e.g. Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, etc.) have
embarked upon the difficult process of applying an SDG lens to financing of
development as a whole. There are considerable differences across the States in
terms of approaches adopted. There is a need to:
• Evolve a national SDG resourcing and budgeting framework which can help in
guiding all States/UTs to gradually adopt the intervention. This would call for a
collaborative initiative between NITI Aayog and the Ministry of Finance.
• Knowledge sharing across the States would also enable mutual learning and
improvement in practices. This is an area where NITI Aayog has considerable
experience, which can be harnessed to good results.
• Resource efficiency in programme implementation is a critical area. Exploring,
identifying, disseminating and helping States adopt measures focused on
resource efficiency will be very helpful.
7.5 Deepening Localisation of SDGs and Capacity

Development
Localisation of SDGs is extremely critical. NITI Aayog’s initiatives for sensitisa-

tion, awareness development and capacity building has been timely but still has to
go a long way.
• Systematic institutional capacity assessment is needed to develop and drive a
nation-wide capacity development agenda. NITI Aayog is advantageously
placed to lead this process in partnership with relevant key resource institutions.
• States (particularly the small ones) and UTs would need fair amount of hands-on
support. Concrete programmes would need to be chalked out and taken forward
soon.
• Identification and collation of good practices will be useful for dissemination
across the country. Inputs can be provided on demand for improving the
functioning of local bodies, both urban and rural.
7.6 Strengthening Monitoring and Evaluation
With the adoption of the NIF and release of the SDG India Index: Baseline Report,
the need for firming up the monitoring system has acquired a new urgency. In
addition to the NIF, States, in most cases, have also adopted additional sets of
indicators to monitor their own performance. This adds many layers to the data
architecture in the country and makes regular collection of data challenging.

Though NITI Aayog does not have the direct responsibility of data management, its
oversight function will involve considerable efforts as follows.
• Regular publication of SDG India Index and facilitation of discussions/
dialogues focused on improving performance.
• Strengthening of capacity development at national and subnational levels for
improving monitoring and reporting in collaboration with relevant Ministries
and research institutions.
• There is a need for regular publication of national status reports on SDGs based
on data generated. At the same time, international reporting of India’s
achievement by way of instruments like the Voluntary National Review at the
High-Level Political Forum will also be done according to the country’s com-
mitment to the 2030 Agenda.
• While the NIF is a very comprehensive one, still the indicators do not capture all
aspects of the SDGs. This is true for any indicator framework however com-
prehensive it may be. Therefore, there is a need to develop a monitoring and
evaluation framework for the SDGs. NITI Aayog can help establish this
framework in partnership with the Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation.
7.7 Knowledge Development and Management
Development ambitions of States and UTs have been galvanised by SDGs. They
have launched a range of efforts pertaining to Sub-State implementation and
monitoring structures, capacity building initiatives, etc. NITI Aayog being the apex
institution for knowledge development has a major role in facilitating continuous
learning, knowledge development and sharing to keep improving the implemen-
tation process. Greater focus is needed on documentation, validation, sharing and
replication of best practices.
References
Coopman, A., Osborn, D., Ullah, F., Aukland, E., & Long, G. (2016). Seeing the whole:
Implementing SDGs in an integrated and coherent way. London: Stakeholder Forum.
Government of Andhra Pradesh. (2017). Sunrise Andhra Pradesh Vision 2029. Amaravati:
Government of Andhra Pradesh.
Government of Haryana. (2017). Vision 2030. Chandigarh: Government of Haryana.
GTF, UNDP, & UN-Habitat. (2016). Roadmap for localizing the SDGs: Implementation and
monitoring at sub-national Level. Accessed on November 28, 2018 from https://www.global-
taskforce.org/roadmap-achieving-sdgs-local-level.
Kanuri, C., Revi, A., Espey, J., & Kuhle, H. (2016). Getting started with the SDGs in cities a guide
for stakeholders. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Accessed on December 12,
2018 from http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/9.1.8.-Cities-SDG-Guide.pdf.
LeBlanc, D. (2015). Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network
of targets. UNDESA Working Paper No. 141, ST/ESA/2015/DWP/141; New York. Accessed
on August 9, 2018 from https://www.un.org/esa/desa/papers/2015/wp141_2015.pdf.
Liu, J., Hull, V., Godfray, H. C. J., Tilman, D., Gleick, P., Hoff, H., et al. (2018). Nexus
approaches to global sustainable development. Nature Sustainability, 1(9), 466–476. https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0135-8.
Lucci, P. (2015). ‘Localising’ the post-2015 agenda: What does it mean in practice? London:
ODI. Accessed on February 15, 2019 from https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-
assets/publications-opinion-files/9395.pdf.
Nilsson, M., Griggs, D., Visbeck, M., Riegler, C., & McCollum, D. (2017). Introduction:
Framework for understanding SDG interactions. A guide to SDG interactions: From science to
implementation. International Council for Science (ICSU). Paris, France. Accessed on August
9, 2018 from https://council.science/cms/2017/05/SDGs-Guide-to-Interactions.pdf.
NITI Aayog. (2017). India three year action agenda 2017-18 to 2019-20. New Delhi: NITI
Aayog.
NITI Aayog. (2018a). The strategy for New India@75. New Delhi: NITI Aayog.
NITI Aayog. (2018b). The SDG India Index: Baseline report, 2018. New Delhi: NITI Aayog.
Saner, R., & Michalun, M. (Eds). (2009). Negotiations between state actors and non-state actors:
Case analyses from different parts of the world (410 pp). The Hague: Republic of Letters.
Stafford-Smith, M., Griggs, D., Gaffney, O., et al. (2017). Integration: The key to implementing
the Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability Science, 12, 911–919. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11625-016-0383-3.
Stern, A., Kingston, D., & Ke, J. (2015). More than the sum of its parts: Making multi-stakeholder
initiatives work. Washington DC: Global Development Incubator (GDI).
Treichel, K., Höh, A., Biermann, S., & Conze, P. (2017). Multi-stakeholder partnerships in the
context of agenda 2030: A practice-based analysis of potential benefits, challenges and success
factors. Bonn: Partnerships 2030. Accessed on November 28, 2018 from https://www.
partnerschaften2030.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Multi-stakeholder-partnerships-in-the-
context-of-Agenda-2030.pdf.
UN Development Group. (2014). Localizing the post-2015 development agenda: Dialogues on
implementation. Accessed on November 28, 2018 from https://www.uclg.org/sites/default/
files/dialogues_on_localizing_the_post-2015_development_agenda.pdf.
United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability and United Nations.
(2018). Partnering for sustainable development: guidelines for multi-stakeholder partnerships
to implement the 2030 agenda in Asia and the Pacific. Tokyo and Bangkok: United Nations.
Chapter 12
Sustainable Development Goals:
Assam’s Experience from Quantitative
to Qualitative Development
V. K. Pipersenia, Rudra Mani Dubey and Supriya Khound
Abstract Integrated approach is the key to the success of the SDGs. The chapter
seeks attention to the issues of decentralisation towards sustainability by drawing
upon the attention for managing resources, capacity development and account-
ability mechanism at the local level in India. Assam was the first state to adopt a
state plan for SDGs, namely, ‘Vision Assam 2030’ and set an example for others in
terms of decentralised management of SDGs. The chapter discusses its rationale,
challenges and draws a roadmap to create awareness, evaluate performance, and
improve transparency and inclusion at local governance. Elected representatives
and even judiciary have also been mobilised for actualising implementation of
SDGs in the State. The chapter suggests, as way forward for localisation of the
SDGs at the grassroots level, developing partnership with non-government players,
mobilising all kinds of resources and creating an effective monitoring system for
SDG implementation.
Keywords State action plan Assam Agenda 2030 Localisation of SDGs
1 Introduction
The adoption of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), also referred as

Global Agenda, with 169 targets on 25th September 2015 by the United Nations
General Assembly, marked the beginning of a transformative agenda, to achieve
peace and prosperity across the globe and end all forms of poverty by 2030. The
SDGs are based on the learnings of the earlier Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs) with a strengthened emphasis on sustainability, environment and global
V. K. Pipersenia
Assam Power Distribution Company Limited, Bijuli Bhawan, Panbazar,
Guwahati 781001, India
R. M. Dubey (&) S. Khound
Centre for Sustainable Developmental Goals, Assam Administrative Staff College,
Khanapara, Guwahati 781022, India
e-mail: csdgs.assam@gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_12
256 V. K. Pipersenia et al.
partnerships. People, planet, prosperity, peace and partnerships are the five key
pillars of the SDGs. They aim to not just transform societies but focus and include
the most marginalised communities and people, so that ‘no-one is left behind’. These
universal goals aim to target some of the critical issues which our world faces today
and structured around achieving social, economic and environmental welfare for all.
After the United Nations’ adoption of the Global Agenda 2030, Assam was the
first State in India to formally acknowledge and accept the SDGs as the pathway for
all future development. Assam, one of the eight northeastern states of India, is both
rich and complex with a myriad of diversity in terms of natural resources, and
biodiversity, a kaleidoscope of cultural and ethnic groups, and vast geographical
topography. This is a state which has been perennially affected by natural disasters,
particularly, the floods and, for almost two decades, by extremist violence.
However, lately, Assam has been developing fast. Faster development has also
brought forth unique challenges of ensuring economic development without
adversely impacting its rich bio-resources and social capital.
Changing the process of governance and introducing measurable qualitative
systems requires understanding methodologies for increasing efficiency and effec-
tiveness of current systems which does not focus on the quality but quantity. The
SDGs provided a pathway for Government of Assam to engage in a process of good
governance backed by qualitative outputs which enhance productivity and ensure
the sustainability of the future of the State. The following sections will reflect the
process of how SDGs have been integrating into the larger policy process of the
state, through many strengths and shortfalls, into a definitive means for creating
qualitative results based developmental impact till 2030.
2 SDGs in Assam
The Government of Assam was quick to recognise the potential of the SDGs on
peace and prosperity of each citizen of the state and their role in the preservation of
environment and overall development of the state in a sustainable manner. With this
objective in mind, the Government of Assam issued a Government Order (GO) on
28th December 2015 formally announcing the adoption of SDGs in the state with
effect from 1st January 2016. It also provided a strategic architecture and blueprint
for this purpose. This was preceded and followed by intense structured as well as
informal discussions, awareness generation and sensitisation at all levels in the
Government regarding the opportunity the SDGs provided to the State. On 5th
January 2016, the first formal Conference on SDGs was organised with more than
150 state government officers for developing a strategy for implementation of the
SDGs in the state. To carry forward SDG related activity, the Transformation &
Development Department. was designated as a Nodal Department and a new centre,
The Centre for Sustainable Development Goals (CSDGs) was established at the
Assam Administrative Staff College (AASC), Guwahati. While a number of experts
12 Sustainable Development Goals: Assam’s Experience … 257
were invited to help the state Government, two of them were formally engaged with
the CSDGs. This Centre was, particularly, asked;
1. to provide knowledge, spread awareness and understanding on SDGs to all
especially in the state, district, block and Gaon Panchayat (GP) level;
2. to initiate studies, research and other academic studies to understand the
implementation, gaps and interventions required for achieving SDGs in Assam;
3. to coordinate the activities related to the SDGs of the Government of Assam at
all levels and;
4. to develop and initiate projects and programmes, through partnerships, related to
SDGs.
3 SDG Integration Process
The Government of Assam moved with great speed and on 10th February 2016,
released a Vision Document 2030 in a Partnership Conclave which was attended by
nearly 250 internal and external stakeholders. The high point of this conference was
Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Advisor to UN Secretary General on SDGs also joining and
addressing the Conclave via Skype. Professor Sachs’s address was very encour-
aging. He said that the Government of Assam was the first government in the world
to adopt SDGs and to prepare a Vision Document on them. Some of his words are
given below:
It is truly a milestone that Assam is first to produce the 1st SDG Vision Document in the
world. SDGs are really a bold idea for sustainable development and your grasp of the SDGs
is a bold addition and it is an inspiration to all. Adoption of SDGs in the state in mission
mode will rejuvenate the whole world. Assam will become the world leader in sustainable
development.
3.1 Early Strengths and Shortfalls
After publication of the Vision Document, a massive programme for training of

Government officials of various departments was taken up so as to infuse the basic
spirit of SDGs in their thinking and day-to-day activities. They were encouraged to
think as officials of the government rather than a department or office. They were
also encouraged to come out with their own ideas of how their departments were
concerned with the SDGs and how they could, both as individuals as well as
government official, contribute to SDGs. The main objective of the training was to
drive home the point that for the SDGs to be achieved, require the support, con-
tribution and determination on the part of everyone and working in departmental
silos will not work anymore as all SDGs were inter-connected and inter-dependent.
It was also explained that the work on all SDGs has begun simultaneously and
pursuing a few goals and neglecting some others will not succeed.
3.2 7-Year Strategy and 3-Year Action Plan
The inter-departmental discussions created a consensus on what kind of long term

strategy should be adopted by the Government for achieving SDGs. There was
unanimity of opinion that while the strategy could be long term, the action plans
should be at best medium term with a scope to correct the course as and when felt
necessary. There was also consensus on the point that, for SDGs, departmental
plans will have to give way to goal-wise inter-departmental plans and a new
methodology of working together by different departments will have to be evolved
to achieve the objective. After lot of deliberation, it was decided to have a 7-year
Strategy Plan and 3-year Action Plans (SPAPs) for each goal and to prepare the
same, eight working groups were formed with an Additional Chief Secretary/
Principal secretary as the chairperson and officers of the related departments as
members.
In March 2016, in a meeting between the state government and UN Country
Representative and Country Director, UNDP, UN agencies expressed their full
commitment and support to the Government of Assam in taking forward the Global
agenda. UNDP’s support proved to be invaluable and monumental in strengthening
the newly established Centre for SDGs and exposing various departments to the
global best practices. UNDP generously provided two Technical Officers to this
Centre, besides bringing a score of experts of various disciplines to assist the state
government in preparing the SPAPs.
3.3 General Elections
Just when these activities were on, Assembly elections were announced to elect the
new Legislative Assembly. Elections kept field officers busy with the
election-related works but most of the officers in the offices of heads of departments
and secretariat are relatively free as no new work can be initiated nor any new
announcement be made. All officers in the offices of heads of departments and
secretariat were, therefore, encouraged to use this unique window of time, learn and
find out global best practices regarding their area of work and prepare draft SPAPs so
that they are presented before the new government as soon as it takes charge. These
Working Groups did a great job and came out with several innovative ideas in their
reports. These Working Groups also led to improved understanding about each other
and effectively built inter-departmental teams. This mechanism also reinforced the
commitment of individual officers towards SDGs. This time was also utilised
towards training, capacity building and preparation of their departmental SPAPs.
The Assam Assembly elections concluded in May 2016 bringing in their wake a
new government. The new Government also fully owned the SDG agenda
and released one more document, supplementing the Vision document issued
earlier. This document was called ‘Assam 2030: Our Dreams, Our Commitment’.
This document set forth a larger vision to be achieved by the state by focusing on
the key principles highlighted in the SDGs, i.e. ‘leaving no-one behind’, through
the tag-line ‘Sabka Saath; Sabka Vikas’. The document highlighted the need for a
future-ready governance system, which is people-centric and develops human
resources, promotes infrastructure and sustainable livelihoods and integrates sus-
tainability by protecting the rich biodiversity and natural resources of the state.
3.4 Drafting of Assam Agenda 2030: Strategies and Actions

for Achieving the SDGs in Assam
Following this, the concept of the working groups was re-worked as most
departments were concentrating only on their own departmental activities. This led
to the creation of nine clusters with one department as lead for each goal and other
departments in the role of supporting and cross-cutting departments. These groups
organised into nine conclaves with each conclave designed towards creating a
single synergised approach towards achieving the larger goals through finalising
their SPAPs and consulting across departments for achieving the same. These nine
conclaves have resulted in nine chapters and the final culmination of the ‘Assam
Agenda 2030: Strategies and Actions for Achieving the SDGs in Assam’.
Example of structure of Group 1 for designing cross-convergence between
departments:
No. SDG Lead Supporting Cross-cutting

1. 1. (Poverty SDG 1 Agriculture, Social Social Welfare
Eradication) 1. Panchayat Welfare, Industries (Gender), WPT & BC,
& Rural (Small and Tea Tribes Welfare,
Development Microenterprises, AH Minority Development,
&Veterinary, Dairy Char Areas, Hill Areas,
Development, Fishery, Science & Technology,
Sericulture, Handloom Information
& Textile, PWD, Technology,
Power) Information &
2. 2. (Zero SDG 2 Irrigation, Health and Publicity.
Hunger) 2. Agriculture FW, Panchayat and Transformation &
Rural Development, Development
Food & Civil Supplies, Department
Fishery, Animal
Husbandry &
Veterinary Soil
Conservation, Water
Resources, Revenue &
Disaster Management
Source Assam Agenda 2030
The Assam Agenda 2030 sets forth various milestones which departments need
to achieve to fulfil the 2030 Agenda. Each chapter highlights a set of interventions
which have been integrated through the participatory consultation process. The
Assam Agenda 2030 which is now ready for release, brings out the major gaps that
require to be filled up for achievement of the SDGs and what specific actions are
required to achieve the goals by 2030. Each chapter in the Assam Agenda 2030
highlights a set of indicators with baselines and targets set for 2019–20, 2023–24
and 2030–31. The major strategic interventions proposed by the departments are
highlighted along with technological inputs and innovations required, partnerships
to be developed and requirements in terms of financial, infrastructural and human
resources. This Agenda highlights the need for convergence at all levels and is a
result of a rigorous process of consultation and deliberation from multiple stake-
holders in the state.
SDGs timeline (Assam)

Dec 2015: Government Order issued for SDGs
Jan 2016: SDGs adopted
Feb 2016: Vision Assam 2030 released
Feb–June 2016: SPAPs prepared
May–Nov 2016: Training State Officers on SDGs
Oct 2016: Release of Assam 2030: Our Dreams, Our Commitments
Mar 2016: Second Government Order on SDG integration issued
Mar 2016: Outcome budget alignment to SDGs and chapter in economic survey
Apr–Dec 2017: Nine conclaves for finalisation of 9 chapters for Assam Agenda 2030
Nov 2018: Integrating innovation and SDGs among youth and for governance reforms
Nov–Feb 2018: District level trainings for SDGs
Feb 2018: Interaction with MLAs on SDGs
Mar–Apr 2018: SDGs discussed on the floor of Legislative Assembly
Jun 2018–Aug 2019: Monitoring platform prototype developed
Sep 2018: District level SDG manual discussed with districts and councils
Oct 2018: Process document for SDG integration in Assam finalised
Oct 2018: Assam Agenda 2030 released
Oct–Dec 2018: Outcome budgeting process ongoing
3.5 Reorienting SDGs into the Outcome Budget

and Economic Survey
One major initiative of the State is the integration of SDGs into planning and
budgeting process in the state. This integration resulted in the presentation of
first-ever SDG oriented Outcome Budget as a part of the Assam Budget 2017–18.
In the Outcome Budget, head wise grants under each department were identified
and SDG mapping carried out based on a well-defined rationale indicating

goal-wise allocation.
In the Economic Survey of Assam 2016–17 also, a chapter was included in the
baseline, indicators and targets for monitoring the progress of achievements of the
Vision Assam 2030. 59 state-specific core indicators for SDGs were developed and
published in the Economic Survey. This concept was further developed in the
Economic Survey 2017–18 which provided a disaggregated understanding of the
critical SDG indicators where district level data is available.
3.6 Integrating Innovation into SDGs
Innovation, which is an integral part of achieving the SDGs, was also incorporated
into the SDG Journey through an Ideathon, organised with the support of UNDP,
which sought students’ participation in developing localised solutions to regional
issues. An Innovation Summit was also held to seek suggestions on the Governance
reforms required for achievement of the SDGs.
3.7 Taking SDGs to the Grassroots
The process of taking the SDGs to the Districts has also started with the CSDGs and
T&D Department training officials from 19 districts out of 33 in Assam on SDGs.
This sensitization training was the first level of information sharing with districts on
what are the SDGs, how the Government is designing their Strategies and Actions
aligned to the SDGs, the process of integration in the state and the role of Districts,
Blocks and Panchayats/Village Development Councils (VDC)/Village Council
Development Committees (VCDC) in the process. Orientation, Sensitisation and
training to People’s Representatives in Autonomous Councils and 6th Schedule
Councils was also held.
3.8 Engaging Elected Representatives and Judiciary

on SDGs
The engagement of the elected representatives of the state was also done through a
two-days discussion was held in the Central Hall of the State Legislative Assembly
for sensitising MLAs on the SDGs and the progress made by the state on the
various indicators along with presentations on the Assam Agenda 2030. The
two-day interaction was spearheaded by the Hon’ble Speaker of the Assembly and
saw elected representatives, officials from all major departments, experts from the
country and the region who participated actively. The highlight of this interaction
was the address to the MLAs by a senior judge the Gauhati High Court, thus
bringing together all three organs of the government, namely executive, legislative
and judiciary on one platform to deliberate on the most effective ways to achieve
SDGs.
The interaction brought out a consensus on introducing the Speaker’s SDG
Fellowship for providing technical assistance to MLAs for preparation of
Constituency level SDG plans for realising and implementing the SDGs. There was
also a consensus to establish a Legislators’ Forum for SDGs comprising the
members of all political parties to periodically discuss the progress made in
achieving the SDGs in Assam.
Following this, a three-day discussion was held, in March and April 2018, in the
State Legislative Assembly with over twenty Members of the House speaking at the
floor of the House on various issues relating to SDGs.
4 Way Forward for SDGs in Assam
1. Localising the SDGs at the Grassroots: Localising the SDGs and integrating
the voices from the grassroots to understand their needs is an essential com-
ponent of Assam’s strategy for the achievement of SDGs. In this regard, the
Government of Assam’s CSDGs in collaboration with UNICEF and UNDP is
coming out with a SDG District Manual which has been designed to assist
Districts, Blocks and Panchayats and VDC/VCDC’s, to define their roles and
responsibilities for achievement of SDGs in their respective areas. The Manual
will suggest ways, within existing structures, to integrate the voices of most
marginalised groups and communities in the bottom-up planning. This inte-
grated Panchayat Level Development Plans will be synergised with the existing
Gaon Panchayat Development Programmes (GPDP) and will result in greater
convergence between departments and programmes, to direct the available
resources to address the local needs. this will also enable them to demand and
mobilise additional resources from various sources including their own
community.
2. Developing Partnerships: Currently, the state is already partnering with mul-
tiple organisations such as UNDP, UNICEF, TERI, Coalition for Food and
Nutrition Security among others and wants to collaborate further with local/
outside organisations for achievement of the larger goals in localised manner.
3. Mobilising Resources: Along with financial resources the Assam SDG resource
mobilisation strategy includes the ‘7 for 17’ principle which includes seven
types of resources for achieving the 17 Goals including land, human resources,
capital/infrastructure, biological resources, IT resources and institutional
resources. This strategy encourages states to map available resources, creating
channels for identifying gaps in resources and availability of other sources,
building capacities, using technology efficiently and increasing efficiencies

within the system.
4. Creating a Monitoring Platform: A monitoring platform is being developed
which will monitor both outcomes stated in Assam Agenda 2030 and pro-
grammes set forth as the major ones in the state through quarterly monitoring.
The 59 state-specific core indicators will also be part of this monitoring process.
A state-level dashboard is being designed using relevant secondary and primary
data from the different sources along with the scope of conducting annual
sample surveys through specialised agencies to get more real-time under-
standing on the progress of SDGs in the state.
5 Conclusion
Assam today is considered to be at the forefront of SDG movement. This has been
possible by timely integration of SDGs in the developmental framework of the state
and involving all four pillars of democracy, namely executive, legislative, judiciary
and the media along with civil society in the process. The state has invested heavily
in sensitising its machinery and their capacity building. The SDGs have shown a
pathway for development on all fronts; social, economic and environmental. The
developmental planning, which had, so far, been mostly centred towards physical
(quantitative) targets is moving towards qualitative aspects targeting the most
deprived sections of society—people living in the tea garden areas, char (riverine)
areas, minorities, tribal populations located in isolated pockets, people with dis-
abilities and other voiceless sections of society. Having adequately sensitised
officials on SDGs in the state capital and districts, the state is now focusing on the
grassroots and taking SDGs at Panchayat and Village level, through formulation of
Panchayat/Village Level Sustainable Development Plans. These will be integrated
with the States’ Plan and Budget in a synergised manner. Through such integrated
planning, the state is hopeful of achieving its Vision 2030. The partnerships with
UN Agencies, corporates, private businesses, academic institutions, voluntary
agencies, civil society organisations, etc., both within and outside the State, have
already been established. The State is open to more partnerships as when the
opportunities arrive for the same. These partnerships will play a crucial role in
achieving the vision of the state, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Chapter 13
Sustainable Development Goals in India:
Ambitious, but Achievable
Pradeep Baisakh and Amitabh Behar
Abstract The paper focuses on the discussion around the role of civil society in the
sustainable development goals (SDGs), starting from its framing to implementation,
and on different mechanisms of monitoring and accountability. The paper aims at
evaluating the contribution of the civil society in SDG implementation, and make
recommendations to achieve the goals. Agenda 2030, which is popularly known as
SDGs, was adopted by the United Nations in September 2015 involving extensive
process of consultation with various stakeholders, including the civil society and
reckoning the learning from the implementation of the Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs). The civil society played a key role in the drafting phase by
advocating with the governments and the UN systems, and by undertaking mass
actions. The paper briefly discusses about progressive provisions and shortcomings
of the SDGs. India has shown adequate commitment at the top level for its exe-
cution, and structures to carry out the implementation have been put on place.
However, things are hardly changing on the ground. While some of the policy
initiatives are in line of the SDGs, many are not in sync with the leave no one
behind (LNOB) slogan. Civil Society has been active in many ways in influencing
the implementation process, monitoring and seeking accountability. The paper
finally makes some key recommendations vis-à-vis the role of the civil society for
better implementation of the SDGs.
Keywords Civil Society Role Voluntary National Review Process Leave No

One Behind
P. Baisakh
Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP), New Delhi, India
A. Behar (&)
OXFAM India, Shriram Bharatiya Kala Kendra, 4th and 5th Floor, 1, Copernicus Marg,
New Delhi 110001, India
e-mail: amitabh.behar@gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_13
266 P. Baisakh and A. Behar
1 Introduction
The civil society sector plays a critical role in the society by collating and articu-
lating the aspirations and voice of people, particularly of the underprivileged
groups, and engaging with the government, lawmakers, judiciary and media. It is an
important link between the state and the people wherein it strongly pitches for the
inclusion of the people who would otherwise be excluded in the process of
development even in best of the democracies and well-placed systems. It plays the
role of a watchdog for the government institutions and works with people to raise
their awareness about their rights and justice and works for their protection. In a
country like India, which has a robust constitutional democracy with values of
fundamental freedom, socialism, equality and secularism, civil society works
towards democratic and constitutional accountability.
The Millennium Development Goals, MDGs in short, were adopted by the
United Nations in 2000 that framed a set of developmental goals to be achieved in
15 years. It aimed at addressing hunger and extreme poverty, reducing child and
maternal mortality, combating disease, promoting gender equality, achieving uni-
versal primary education, protecting the environment and strengthening global
partnership. The civil society was very closely involved in the process of imple-
mentation of the MDGs in India and other countries. However, the civil society was
not happy with the process of adoption of the MDGs. The MDG framework is
criticized to be exclusive; it is also reductionist in character. A handful of people
sitting in the UN office understandably framed the MDGs and they were adopted by
the member nations.
The trajectory of development was redefined at the global level by adoption of
the Agenda 2030 (popularly known as Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs)
on 25 September, 2015 by the UN General Assembly with 193 members voting for
it including India. Acknowledging the shortcomings of the ‘growth-centric’
development paradigm, the agenda changed the focus towards ‘sustainable, inclu-
sive, equitable and just’ development.
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) paved the way for the SDGs.
Formulations of SDGs reckoned with the experiences from the implementation of
MDGs and the changing developmental realities. During the formulation of the
SDGs, representation from different sections of the society was ensured and phases
of inter-governmental negotiation were done before finalizing the draft. Civil
society was heavily involved in the process of consultations in the post-2015
agenda. In India, the civil society held several consultations with the people and did
mobilizations to highlight the causes and necessities of an inclusive development
paradigm.
A little over two years of consultation resulted in the framing 17 goals and 169
targets. SDGs, however, are not legally binding on the member states though they
are expected to influence their laws and policies. As against MDGs where the
targets are all in aggregated form, in the SDGs framework, there has been clear
discussion and thrust of the inclusion of the various marginalized and excluded
13 Sustainable Development Goals in India: Ambitious … 267
groups in the development process. Leave no one behind (LNOB) is the slogan of
Agenda 2030, which guides the whole framework. The question remains whether
the governments are implementing it or it is another lip service made to the top UN
body.
2 Prominent Features of the SDGs
The civil society is encouraged with the framework of Agenda 2030 as it aims at
protecting the rights and dignity of the people on the margins. The SDGs cover a
range of important issues: socio-economic and environmental, energy and
governance-related issues. They aim to end poverty and hunger, achieve food
security, achieving sustainable economic growth and productive employment,
promote sustainable agriculture, combating inequality, providing quality education,
access to universal healthcare, ensuring gender equality and justice, combating
climate change and conserving oceans. They also aims to protecting wildlife and
managing forests, increase share of renewable energy, striving for a peaceful
society, aspiring for global partnership, enhanced infrastructure, addressing issues
of migration, respecting ethnicity, promoting a just trade regime, ensuring devel-
opment assistance and technological transfer from the developed countries to the
developing and least developing countries (LDCs), etc. It, more importantly, charts
out the ways of implementation and participatory monitoring and review of the
goals and targets. The global leaders deserve kudos for creating a framework, which
at least aims to save the ‘Mother Earth’!
The important achievement for the civil society is that it pushed for the adoption
of a stand-alone goal on inequality (goal 10). For the first time, the debate on
inequality has come to the global forum with clear actions pronounced. There is not
only an exclusive goal on gender equality and justice (goal 5), but the issue of
gender is discussed throughout the document and across the goals. The need for
peaceful society and inclusive and accountable institutions have been articulated
and made a separate goal (goal 16). It assumes significance for the most vulnerable
groups who are subjected to discrimination and violence for various reasons.
3 Critical Assessment of the Agenda 2030
SDGs are not free from criticism. The first and biggest criticism is that while it has
well encompassed the social, economic, cultural and environmental rights, it toned
down the discussion on core political rights of the people. For example, it thinly
mentions about the need for democracy and fundamental freedom. It does not
discuss civil liberties, freedom of expression and press freedom. It does not strongly
call for more and effective participation of the excluded groups in the
decision-making processes which holds key to their development. It admits that
economic growth has been accompanied by rising inequality in the past few years,
but it evades core discussion on the structural aspects of poverty and inequality like
concentration of political power in fewer hands, illegal flight of capital from
developing countries to developed countries so on. Inequality was stark when the
richest 1% owned 48% of the total global wealth in 2014. The document does not
chart out the ways for the downward flow of wealth, which is necessary to promote
equality.
SDG 1 promises to ‘end poverty in all forms and everywhere’. But poverty is
defined as ‘people living on less than $1.25 a day’—which has been the global
poverty line since 2005. But, since the cost of living has also gone up in many
countries, ‘ending poverty’ with this definition is a pretentious promise.
The document promises to provide equal rights to economic resources, owner-
ship and control over land and natural resources, which is quite welcome. But it is
open to interpretation. Does it mean ownership of people within the overarching
definition of ‘eminent domain’ or is it true ownership by the community?
Large-scale transfer of sources of peoples’ livelihood to the big industries in the
form of control over land, forest, and water is a continuous process. The way we
have been seeing things happening till date after the adoption of the Agenda 2030,
this promise is likely to remain only in the textbook. In the conflict between a
development paradigm based on industrial development and community control
over the natural resources, it is the former, which has the upper hand barring some
rare examples.
Alongside the SDG, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on financing for devel-
opment adopted by global leaders in July 2015 must be read. The overwhelming
importance has been attached to private capital for financing the development
visualized in the SDG framework. In a way, the Agenda has legitimized the state
withdrawal from providing essential services like education, health, water sanita-
tion, etc. This could actually prove to be dangerous, as privatization of health and
education has made them unaffordable for the people living in poverty and socially
excluded groups.
The civil society has been critical, as the financing approach has not reckoned
with a rights and justice perspective.
4 Actual Implementation in India
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has endorsed the sustainable development goals
(SDGs) and reiterated India’s commitments towards its fulfilment in the UN and
other international fora like the BRICs and G20. Endorsement has come from the
speaker of the Lok Sabha, Ms. Sumitra Mahajan, who has held discussion on SDGs
in the Parliament and promised to hold regular discussion by the lawmakers in the
house.
NITI Aayog, which is the nodal body for envisioning and overseeing the
implementation of SDGs, has done the mapping of the existing government policies
and linked them to the goals and targets. It has held discussions on various goals
with different stakeholders. It has held discussions on north-east region.
The National Women’s Legislators conference and second BRICS women
Parliamentarian forum held discussions on the gender equity in context of SDGs.
South Asian Speakers’ summit on SDGs held discussion for strengthening the
regional cooperation on SDGs.
At the provincial level, several states have made progress. Most of the states
have the SDG cells now and are in process of mapping the policies and initiatives
vis-à-vis the SDGs. Chhattisgarh has come up with a ‘Naya Raipur Declaration’ as
commitment towards SDGs. Task forces have been constituted, publicity materials
prepared and trainings done in some states. In Andhra Pradesh, a dashboard has
been created for the real-time online outcome monitoring on SDGs. Assam has a set
up a center for SDGs and it has adopted an integrated framework for implemen-
tation of SDGs. Kerala has sector-specific plans for 2030 with emphasis on
entrepreneurship. Haryana has prepared a vision 2030 framework with due con-
sultations with various stakeholders so on and so forth. These are actions in right
direction feels the civil society, but the process should be expedited.
In various consultations some key issues have been identified and recommen-
dations made. For example on goal 1, addressing the multi-dimensional poverty
was stressed. There should be an integrated approach towards pockets of poverty
existing in rural and urban areas with low HDI. Employment for women, violence
free atmosphere, ownership of land and property and giving women representation
in decision-making bodies are the key to gender equality and empowerment under
goal 5. Addressing social inequalities and providing opportunities are measures
ought to be taken to address inequality under goal 10 so on and so forth.
However, in the mapping exercise done by the central government linking
policies to SDGs, there are several discrepancies as pointed out by some civil
society actors. For example, under goal 6 (Access to water), the document claims
that the inter-linking of rivers project fits into the integrated water management.
However, environmentalist suggests that this project, if implemented, will cause
severe ecological damage. Similarly for goal 16 (Peace and Justice), there are
criticisms by CSOs of violation of human rights in the functioning of police and
para-military forces during their operations. The existing schemes meant to address
the inequalities under goal 10 are more of welfare in nature. Some employment
generating schemes are also there. But inequality is a far more serious issue to be
addressed by mere schemes.
Measures to popularize SDGs are rather adhoc. There has hardly been any
serious attempt undertake mass awareness drive and capacity building measures
among the key actors. Similarly the involvement of some key non-state actors like
the local self-governments and the Parliamentarians has remained peripheral and
superficial. The governments in fact should actively partner with the civil society
for popularizing the same given the expertise of the CSOs on the same.
The indicators finalized at the levels of Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation (MOSPI) and NITI Aayog were sent to the cabinet for approval.
The cabinet recently approved the formation of a High-Level Steering Committee
for periodically review the national indicator framework meant for monitoring the
SDGs. The committee will be chaired by the Chief Statistician of India and
Secretary to Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). The
members will consist of secretaries of data source Ministries and members of NITI
Aayog. Secretaries of other related Ministries will be special invitees. Government
sources suggest that the indicator framework has been finalized and will be placed
in the public domain once this committee gives a go-ahead. Though delayed, the
civil society welcomes the move as it is in right direction, which can make the
achievements of SDGs measurable and fix accountability.
There is very little discussion of SDGs in the budgetary process, which is a big
shortcoming. Some NGOs like the CBGA and NCDHR have made budget tracking
to find out the resource allocation to the SDGs. Broad observations suggest that
SDGs have not been aligned with the budgetary allocations—the most crucial
aspect for their execution. Whereas the scheme like National Health Protection
Scheme covering 10 million families is well in line of goal 3 of Agenda 2030
‘ensuring healthy lives and promoting well being’, meagre allocation of 10,000
crore rupees as against the expected need of 100,000 crores per year raises doubts
over it’s implementability. Budgetary allocations to and spending on other flagship
social schemes like rural employment scheme (MGNREGA), food security scheme
(NFSA) and on Beti Bachao have been criticized by experts.
SDGs are good in principle. Some stand-alone initiatives have been taken
towards its fulfilment. They are, however, not systematically thought through and
woven into the SDGs. The interconnectedness among the goals is not understood.
The government has cherry-picked some goals like education, health, climate
change etc. leaving behind very important goals like reducing inequality and
building a peaceful society etc. The inference is that the spirit of SDGs is not
comprehended. The transformative aspects are conspicuously absent in the gov-
ernment’s actions towards realization of sustainable development. It has been
considered as any other framework to get international attention.
The situation in the country currently is marked by rising unemployment, price
rise and unmanageable increase in cost of living, increasing trend in the concen-
tration of wealth with the top 1%, strife among castes and communities, curtailment
of citizens’ right to freedom of expression etc. The recent OXFAM India’s report
suggests that the top 1% of population have bagged 73% of the wealth created in
2017. Despite laudable initiatives taken towards addressing climate change like
adopting an ambitious ‘intended nationally determined contribution (INDC)’ on
climate change, installation of solar parks, creation of Green Energy Corridors,
running renewable capacity expansion programme, India has been ranked 177 of
180 nations in environment performance index in 2018 by a report done by Yale
University and World Economic Forum. All these call for urgent actions towards
realizing SDGs.
There were no serious effort to build the capacity of the task force members and
other such actors on SDGs. The CSO and citizen generated data is hardy used.
5 VNR Process in India—A Critical Review
There is one High-level Political Forum comprising the political representatives

(heads of states or ministers) of the member-states of United Nations, which meets
every July at the UN head quarters in New York to review progress on Agenda
2030. The Voluntary National Review (VNR) forms the basis of this review. VNR
is voluntary and country driven, in 2017, India was among 43 nations, which
presented its review in the HLPF. The goals of Agenda 2030 under review by the
HLPF were ending extreme poverty (Goal 1), ending hunger (Goal 2), ensuring
healthy lives (Goal 3), gender equality (Goal 5), inclusive sustainable industrial-
ization (Goal 9), sustainable oceans (Goal 14) and means of implementation (Goal
17). But the VNR is supposed cover all the goals.
In India NITI Aayog led the process with support and involvement of other
government agencies. It held consultations on the overall SDGs and on particular
themes such as gender etc. where in civil society, private groups and other stake-
holders at the national and State levels were invited to contribute. In the final report
there were mentions of the work of the civil society. But the consultation with
CSOs remained patchy. The official report did not take the CSO recommendations
as part of it or as an annexure.
What Was in the VNR?
In the VNR the government claims that it has made substantial progress in
achieving various goals under Agenda 2030. It portrays a picture of ‘all is well’.
The report suggests that the sharp reduction of poverty from 45.3% in 1993–94 to
22% in 2011–12 is due to the economic growth that took place after economic
liberalization. However, an alternative report on SDGs prepared by CSOs in India,
led by the Wada Na Todo Abhiyan (WNTA), states that India’s growth story of last
twenty or more years has increased inequalities, perpetuated poverty and shrunk the
choices available for the historically marginalized communities.
The VNR report also states that the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has lifted millions out of poverty since
its inception in 2005. It created more than two billion person-days of employment
in 2016–17 alone. This is a welcome sign. However, budgetary allocation to the
scheme has slowed down in recent years resulting in pending payments and doing
other forms of damage to the implementation of the scheme. The report further
states, to reduce hunger and malnutrition, the National Food Security Act aims to
provide food grains to 66% of the population, covering about 800 million people. It
further boasts that to ensure transparency, 77% of the ration cards have been linked
to Aadhaar—the biometric based identification number. In fact in forum after
forums government has claimed that the Aadhaar initiative has potential for suc-
cessful delivery of welfare schemes and has minimized leakage. But field evidence
suggests that mandatory linkage with Aadhaar is excluding the needy people in the
interior tribal pockets. The reported occurrences of hunger-related deaths in
Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh like states in recent days owing to making the UID
mandatory for getting rations are in sharp contrast to government’s claim.
The VNR report states that the government, through its National Mission on
Sustainable Agriculture, provision of soil health cards and crop insurance, claims to
have helped small and marginal farmers, who form 80% of our farmer population.
However, the theory is debunked by the fact that nearly 3,00,000 farmers com-
mitted suicide in last two decades. The NDA government has promised to double
farmers’ income, but the increase in MSP has generally been meagre till recently
when it raised it to a significant level. Further, the Shanta Kumar committee’s
recommendation of replacing PDS by cash transfer which will eventually do away
with the procurement system, if materializes, will bring incalculable misery to the
small scale farmers.
India has made significant progress over the years on basic health indicators like
Infant Mortality Rate (IMR), Maternal Mortality Rate (MMR), institutional deliv-
eries and vaccination coverage, states the report. However, 62.4% of the total health
expenditure is still out of pocket, putting a huge burden on the poor and the middle
class, says the civil society report. In this regard, the aim of the National Health
Policy, 2017 of providing affordable health care is welcome.
6 From the Lens of Leave No One Behind (LNOB)
The core of Agenda 2030 is leaving no one behind, which ought to be visible in the
government’s actions while implementing the goals. However, this is exactly where
there is lack of commitment. The CSOs, while engaging in the process formation of
the SDGs, advocated hard to include the ‘Dalit’ communities as the most
marginalize groups. ‘Dalit’ is the generic term for the caste-based discrimination in
India and in South Asia. It is understood that the government of India was not
comfortable with the term, therefore the term did not find a mention in the docu-
ment. As many as 260 million ‘Dalits’ spread across Asia, Africa and European
countries are facing caste-based discrimination which did not get adequate attention
in the SDG framework. In India, the number is about 200 million. There are laws
and policies for fair treatment to these communities in India. But hardly this is
reflected in practice. There are several recent instances where the Dalits students are
discriminated; Dalit people are beaten in public so on. So much so, the union
minister for social justice Thawarchand Gehlot has advised against the use of term
‘Dalit’!
Many CSOs are of the view that governments after governments have neglected
and usurped land and mineral below land from the Tribal communities in India.
SDGs have not made any difference to their status. Every other day one hears of a
tribal being killed or put behind the bar in name of being a Maoist cadre in tribal
areas where the ‘red rebels’ are operating. There is no clue if they are really part of
the banned group or they are just any ordinary tribals.
The status of women can well be understood in the post-SDG era in India from
the Sabarimala temple standoff in Kerala. While the top court ordered to end the
entry ban of the women in the temple, the implementation is opposed by many
political and social groups in the name of protecting tradition. It may be noted that
earlier women of menstruating age were not allowed to enter this temple.
7 The Role of Initiative of the Civil Society
The civil society in India has been proactively engaged in various ways in Agenda
2030. The engagement can be classified in four-folds.
i. Popularising and spreading awareness:
CSOs at the national and state levels have has spread awareness through commu-
nications material like posters, leaflets, training, discussions through workshops and
consultations.
ii. Identifying and analyzing policy gaps and advocacy:
The civil society has engaged at various levels in identifying the policy coherence
with the SDGs and the gaps. It has engaged with the state in bridging the gap
adopting various techniques of advocacy like meeting the key policymaker, inviting
policymakers to consultations and sharing the findings and viewpoints. It also has
undertaken people’s actions to draw attention of the authorities, lawmakers and the
media.
iii. Identify the critical accountability framework:
Accountability framework of the SDGs assumes significance due to its non-binding
character. The existing VNR mechanism is not sufficient for effective monitoring of
the SDGs. The civil society at the global level and at India level has been in
constant discussion on various ways and mechanisms to ensure that the government
lives up to its international commitments. The discussion is still on and the
mechanism is still to be evolved.
iv. Actual process of monitoring:
The civil society has been constantly monitoring the implementation of the SDGs
through various means. It did shadow report on SDGs in 2017 when India reported
for the VNR. It has held consultations to give inputs to the indicator framework
being prepared by the government. It is doing so by budget tracking—bringing
forth the facts on resource allocation to implementation of various goals and targets.
On occasions, it has discussed the state of development and human rights and
linked the discourse to the SDGs.
8 Some Concrete Initiatives by the Civil Society
8.1 Global Day of Action, September 25
On 25th September, the day Agenda 2030 was adopted, is being observed a the
global day of action by Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP) and mass
actions are organized across the world to commemorate the occasion. Initially,
GCAP and UN SDG Action Campaign started the campaign in 2017 and this year
Action for Sustainable Development (APSD) joined.
Wada Na Todo Abhiyan (WNTA) is the national campaign in India, which has
been engaged in the implementation of SDGs. Since its inception in 2004, it is
engaged in the MGD process. In the SDG era, the network consisting of 4000
NGOs are variedly engaged in undertaking mass actions to brand SDGs and spread
awareness. WNTA is the GCAP India chapter. WNTA and its partners have been
active in the global day of action from 2017. It has undertaken several on-ground
and online actions to create awareness, seek accountability and to create impact.
In 2018 WNTA engaged the youth to spread awareness on the SDGs and key
communication material were prepared on inequality of the Dalits—the group
facing discrimination based on work and dissent. Some more actions were under-
taken as follows:
• Parvi and WNTA held consultation on SDGs Goal 8, 10 and 16 on 16th Sept.
• Two-days consultation in Tamil Nadu by SDG Watch TN (WNTA, TN
Chapter).
• Photos, essay and tale/poetry competitions among students on LNOB and
discrimination/inclusion.
• Social media campaign on SDGs on discrimination.
• Photo stunts in front of monuments and video in Delhi.
Apart from WNTA, Madhya Pradesh based organization Gopal Kiran Samaj
Sevi Sanstha took out a candle march as part of their awareness campaign. They
also held interactions with the children; self-help group women and jail inmates on
SDGs. Association for Promotion of Sustainable Development (APSD) in Haryana
organized discussion on SDGs in rural areas. Organizations also submitted mem-
orandums on SDG to the district and state-level authorities for demanding imple-
mentation of SDGs.
GCAP and Action4SD highlighted some of these actions and videos in social
media for the global audience.
8.2 Shadow Report by WNTA—Identifying Policy

and Implementation Gaps
WNTA used the opportunity of the VNR process to do a thorough review of the
goals of SDGs in 2017. It produced the Civil Society Report on SDGs:
Agenda 2030 by involving the larger civil society in India. Different CSO groups
were formed around ten goals of the Agenda 2030. They are: goal 1 (poverty), goal
2 (hunger), goal 3 (health), goal 4 (Education), goal 5 (gender), goal 6 (water), goal
10 (Inequality), goal 13 (climate change), goal 16 (peace). The report was prepared
through and consultations with local communities, particularly, the marginalized
communities and using the secondary sources. The report has used the lens of
‘Leave No One Behind’ and ‘A Life of Dignity for All’ as proposed by the SDG
framework.
The aim of this report was to highlight the status of implementation of the SDGs
and share with the stakeholders at national level and with the UN and other
International agencies. It aims to create traction on SDGs and evolve a common
civil society accountability framework from the prism of social exclusion. The
Report also envisaged mapping the existing government interventions at various
levels as well as to identify the gaps and challenges to achieve the SDGs.
The recommendations and suggestions emerging from the Civil Society Report
on SDGs will be shared with the Government of India, parliamentarians, thematic
experts, government think tanks, other government departments and will form the
basis for advocacy. The report was released both in New Delhi an in New York.
Separately the civil society has engaged with the government in giving inputs to
the VNR process and in framing the indicators.
8.3 100 Hotspots Study by WNTA
The 100 Hotspots study intended to highlight the status of the socially excluded
communities in 100 backward areas of the country, which will encompass the
regional and local diversities. It will link them to the functioning of the SDGs.
Household surveys will be done into primarily ascertain how the flagship pro-
grammes of the government are doing, e.g. MGNREGA (Rural employment
scheme) (SDG 8), NFSA (food security) (SDG 2), Swachh Bharat Abhiyan (Clean
India campaign—100% sanitation drive) (SDG 6), NHM (health mission) (SDG 3),
RTE (Education) (SDG 4) and Beti Bachao and Beto Padhao (Teach the girl child)
(SDG 4 and 5). The lens of inequality (goal 10) will be used to do the study.
It will include in the study the low-income states, the Scheduled Tribe com-
munities, the scheduled caste communities, Nomadic and Denotified communities,
Persons with disability across diverse disabilities, LGBTQI, persons engaged in
stigmatizing occupations like manual scavengers, persons affected by particular
illnesses like HIV-AIDS, women across different social groups, particularly women
from socially excluded groups, women with disabilities, single women, women in
sex work, migrant women etc., migrant and urban slum populations, people living
in conflict areas, youth, and the groups affected by climate changes—fisher com-
munity, forest community, agriculture community.
The study will provide a very vivid picture of how far SDGs have percolated to
the local levels. All efforts will be made to use the study findings to engage with
NITI Aayog and state-level planning bodies, which anchor the SDG process at
national and state levels.
9 Ground Level Panel Discussion
PRAXIS, a civil society group has organized ground-level panels where people
facing different kinds of vulnerabilities and marginalization discuss their situations
and the existing policies which impact their lives. The aim of the exercise is to give
a different perspective to the policy-making processes at various levels which are by
professionals, academicians and politicians. It has now linked the process to the
SDGs. For example, in June 2017, it held such a panel discussion with the
Denotified and Nomadic Tribes (DNT NAG) who have been suffering due to
out-dated law that had branded their predecessors as criminals. These communities
shared their experiences in relation to the SDGs and came up with suggestions for
the government to consider.
10 Recommendations
The government has time and scope to bring thrust into achieving the goals. It
ought to understand that realizing SDGs is not possible by the government alone. It
has to take it to a campaign mode like the polio eradication campaign! Remember,
how Polio campaign was a success. Partnership with the civil society and other
stakeholders should be formalized in line of High-Level Political Forum (HLPF)
and the Asia Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development (APFSD) and South Asia
Forum on Sustainable Development. At the national something like a ‘National
Forum on Sustainable Development (NFSD)’ could be conceived for a
multi-stakeholder engagement including the civil society. Discussion should be
held at the local bodies; personalities ought to be involved in spreading the message
of sustainability etc. The time for rhetoric on sustainable development is over; it is
time for concrete, visible and accountable actions.
While this is well placed for encouraging the private sector involvement in the
spirit of multi-stakeholder partnership the SDGs, what is the colour of the private
investments need scrutiny given the records of rights violation and environmental
damage caused many Private investors. Transparency in private investments is
needed to ensure that they are nurturing sustainable development, not other way
round. The governments should report about these investments in the Parliament
and in the UN High-Level Political Forum (HLPF).
While the governments ought to do a lot more to synchronize human rights in
sustainable development given the ongoing violence and discrimination against the
minorities, Dalits etc. the civil society has a strong role in pushing for it.
And finally, the governments should place a report card every year on the SDGs
in the public domain and in Parliament and state legislatures.
References
Baisakh, P. (2015). How sustainable are SDGs? India Together. 9 December. http://www.
indiatogether.org/how-sustainable-are-the-sdgs-government.
Baisakh, P. (2017). The scale of progress, so far. The Hindu. 4 May. http://www.thehindu.com/
opinion/op-ed/the-scale-of-progress-so-far/article18385387.ece.
Baisakh, P. (2017). Masking the flaws. The Hindu. 18 July. http://www.thehindu.com/todays-
paper/tp-opinion/masking-the-flaws/article19298969.ece.
Baisakh, P. (2017). Action sought on sustainable goals. Governance Now. 9 October. https://www.
governancenow.com/news/regular-story/action-sought-on-sustainable-goals.
Baisakh, P. (2018). Citizens in Asia strong the streets demanding implementation of SDGs. Delhi
Post. 22 November. https://delhipostnews.com/citizens-in-asia-throng-the-streets-demanding-
implementation-of-sdgs/.
Baisakh, P., & Behar, A. (2019). Joining the SDG Dots. 20 March. https://www.outlookindia.com/
magazine/story/india-news-joining-the-sdg-dots/301335.
Bureau, ET. (2015). Modi government approves steep hike in MSP for Kharif crops.
Economic Times. 5 July. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/agriculture/
modi-government-approves-hike-in-msp-for-kharif-crops/articleshow/64852476.cms.
Government of India. (2017). Voluntary National Review report on implementation of sustainable
development goals. July. https://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Final_VNR_report.pdf.
Mathur, S., & Ghildiyal, S. (2018). Union Minister: Stick to SC, avoid the term Dalit. Times of
India. 5 September. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/union-minister-stick-to-sc-avoid-
the-term-dalit/articleshow/65678197.cms.
Praxis. http://www.praxisindia.org/VoiceForChange.php.
Wada Na Todo Abhiyan. (2017). Sustainable development goals: Agenda 2030, India—A civil
society report. http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Civil-society-Report-on-SDGs.
pdf.
Part III
Emerging Paradigm and Global
Partnership
Chapter 14
India’s Pursuit of SDGs: Unfolding
Paradigm Shifts and Convergence
Abstract Empowered with strong political will, India has devoted substantial
attention towards adopting inclusive and transformative approaches in addressing
the challenges that fall at the intersection of sustainable economic growth, social
sector development and environmental sustainability. This chapter captures the
philosophy of new development strategy and also the paradigm shifts in India. The
vision of national development is synchronised with the vision of Agenda 2030 and
that creates the necessary confluence among various groups and agencies to stir and
push the economic growth from quantity to quality. The chapter draws together the
lessons from previous sections of this volume and examines the structural change
undertaken in social sector for holistic development and embedding inclusive
development in the spirit of “Sabka Saath Sabka Vikas”. The chapter analyses the
needs for coordination and convergence in policy-making and also examines
the current actions of all the players for success of the SDG implementation. The
chapter attempts to identify priorities based on local needs for inclusive develop-
ment. Further, the chapter examines the dynamics of the evolvement process of
global indicators and monitoring of SDGs. Lastly, the chapter articulates the
importance of goal 17 and examines India’s contribution for strengthening global
and regional partnership for SDGs.

Keywords Paradigm shift Convergence Inclusive development Composite

development strategy Global and regional partnership
The research support of Ms. Amika Bawa, Research Assistant, RIS is acknowledged.
S. Chaturvedi T. C. James (&) S. Saha P. Shaw

Countries (RIS), Lodhi Road, 110003 New Delhi, India

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9091-4_14
1 Philosophy Underlying SDGs and Paradigm Shifts

in India
The introduction of SDGs, which reflects the philosophy of human security and
ecological balance substantially raise hope to ensure the well-being of all citizens
across the world. The agreed agenda of sustainability is a perfect example of
convergence of idea for ‘One World’ and since ages India is inspired by this and
our civilisation values promote and nurture sharing and cooperation. Even as the
significance of sustainable development is intrinsic to Indian ways of life, the
monumental thrust that the concept of sustainable and inclusive economic progress
has received in recent years by all estimates predates the initiation of the SDGs.
India’s development strategies aimed to lift vast number of poor people out of
poverty through rapid and inclusive growth. India’s ideational influence on the
global governance architecture reflects commitment to solidarity, equity and shar-
ing. This is evident from India’s support towards fellow developing countries in the
form of resource sharing, sharing of technical knowledge, and contribution to their
capacity building. The global framework of the SDGs dissolves well in the policy
solutions emerging in India and therefore there is every reason to believe that India
would actually demonstrate credible functional models on the SDGs. The policy
coherence with SDGs, localisation efforts, emerging evidence, achievements and
best practices were captured in India’s Voluntary National Review report presented
in 2017 at the United Nations.
The SDGs are, therefore, aligned with national priorities in India. India is steadfast
in pursuing a comprehensive and integrated strategy on national development that
could fulfil the aspirations enshrined in the Agenda 2030—inclusive, sustainable, and
universal in nature with the mantra of ‘leaving no one behind’. This idea overlapping
with India’s own development agenda of ‘Sabka Sath Sabka Vikas’ meaning ‘col-
lective effort, inclusive development’, which forms the cornerstone of Indian gov-
ernance and policy-making. The possible roles of SDGs in improving development
outcomes in India has attracted the lawmakers and parliamentarians, particularly,
women parliamentarian across all the political parties to deliberate on major issues.
India has adopted the transformative approach to address the emerging challenges that
are interlinked with economic growth, development and sustainability.
In the recent past, India with strong and stable political mandate at the national
level has devoted substantial attention towards adopting inclusive and transfor-
mative approaches in addressing the challenges that fall at the intersection of
sustainable economic growth, social sector development and environmental sus-
tainability. The policy design and framework has several encouraging elements in
this regard. The new approach is perhaps embedded in integration and convergence
to tackle multidimensional nature of challenges and has distinct characteristics in
terms of high level of ambition, bold policy push and imagination for greater scale
and universal access. The focus on good governance has also been complemented
with partnership building efforts with other stakeholders in the spirit of collective
responsibility.
14 India’s Pursuit of SDGs: Unfolding Paradigm Shifts … 283
It is a pity that developing countries like India bear the burden of historical
callousness on part of the developed world that lead to unsustainable consumption
and production in privileged regions of the world. Such historical disparities in
wealth accumulation through unsustainable means come in the way of aspirations
of similar prosperity for the remaining global citizenry. However, some of the large
developing countries that have risen to be leading economies in the twenty-first
Century are relying on technological and institutional innovations to adopt envi-
ronmentally sustainable strategies and also deliver on distributive justice. As
elaborated in this volume, India has come a long way in this regard.
1.1 Entitlement to Entrepreneurship Approach
The push for breaking away from long pursued templates of development inter-
ventions have naturally given credence to ‘paradigm shifts’ in policymaking that
are in some ways inevitable for expediting development transitions. Such paradigm
shifts are reflected in push for entrepreneurship at the grassroots, reduce dualism
and shrink informal economy, macroeconomic resilience and resource efficiency.
India’s current strategy for policies and programmes aimed to promote sus-
tainable inclusive development and invest in human capacity, ensure that the gains
of economic development continue to flow till the last mile. The highly popular
flagship programmes of the government like Make in India, Digital India, Start-up
India and Skill India are finely linked with one another to strengthen the ecosystem
that would lead to job creation through skill development, industrialisation and
further growth and sophistication of the services sector. Also, Aadhaar enabled
financial services through Jan Dhan Yojana, which rapidly expanding the digital
transactions and these digital revolution is transforming the nature of
entrepreneurship in India. Moreover, these initiatives have made systemic change
along with socio-economic transformation, which is largely supported by digital
revolution. It is evident in the recent shift the gradual transition from an
entitlement-based approach towards the expansion of entrepreneurial base at the
bottom, transforming the informal sector towards formalisation and ensuring eco-
nomic growth that is environmentally sensitive with a lesser carbon footprint.
1.2 Quantity to Quality
To achieve the aforementioned paradigm shift there is need to go beyond traditional

perspectives on many of the issues and come up with fresh analysis and new lens to
objectively capture the trajectory of transformative changes associated with rising
prosperity in the post-economic liberalisation period in India and the major leaps on
inclusive development since the turn of the century. India, a very large country in
terms of size of the population and geographical expanse had been reduced to a
resource-poor and development sick country due to multiple historical factors
including colonial rule. The development gaps were visible all across and lingered
for several decades after Independence from the colonial occupation around the
middle of the previous century. Prompted by the urgency, key initiatives in recent
decades were designed and implemented to achieve large scale development
transformations. Having taken care of the concerns of large numbers for any
development intervention in core areas of social sector development through better
governance, strengthening of institutional delivery mechanisms, devolution of large
quantum of resources; focus has since shifted to ensuring ‘quality outcomes’ to
ensure irreversible turnaround towards durable, equitable and sustainable
development.
There have been apprehensions about multiple factors hindering economic
growth in India including continued deficiencies in institutional, human and tech-
nological capital particularly in the face of opulent demographic opportunities. In
the post Independence period, India’s growth performance has been mixed and the
recent decades of high growth have not been able to fully discount macro-economic
stress factors. Such challenges multiply when one takes into consideration the need
for sustainable development in totality. Traditional models of consumption, pro-
duction and industrialisation would not support the need of growing population.
Thus, a course of correction is needed, in the Indian context as well, to bring about
credible changes (by 2030 for the sake of SDGs!) in terms of lowering of carbon
footprint of development, inclusivity and equity for social and economic justice.
1.3 Singular to Cross-Domain Approach
There has been an evolved understanding that the objectives of poverty reduction,
affordable and quality healthcare, acceptable nutrition levels among citizens, clean
and hygienic habitat, minimising vulnerabilities of livelihood, climate change risks,
and exposure to disasters etc. would essentially be interconnected, though at
varying degrees depending on the context. Therefore, integrated and multipronged
approaches are inevitable to minimise exclusions and for providing opportunities
for holistic development that are self-sustaining. The paradigm shift towards
deepening inclusivity should, therefore, be adequately informed of multidimen-
sionality of challenges.
India has made progress in implementing multi-sectoral policies and pro-
grammes such as Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (encompassing financial
inclusion and social security to address extreme poverty as identified under SDG 1);
Aadhaar (providing the citizens a unique identification number, facilitating financial
inclusion and broader goals of SDG 16 and linked with direct benefits transfer to
ensure targeted subsidy delivery, transparency and fiscal prudence); Swachh Bharat
Mission (addresses multiples SDGs and involving various stakeholders from all
sectors to ensure a clean and sustainable environment) and made efforts for the
localisation of SDGs through Gram Panchayats to name a few.
The SDGs while offering substantial insights on cross-domain ramifications of
development and sustainability challenges; remain short of articulating the intri-
cacies of multipronged development strategies that would be in demand. Recent
policy experiments in India with regard to poverty alleviation strategies (financial
inclusion and social security); livelihood support particularly for rural and agri-
cultural workforce; entrepreneurship and skilling; gender-sensitive access/title to
host of public delivery services (e.g. cooking gas and subsidised housing);
affordable healthcare and improved sanitation for all, etc. definitely suggest global
best practice on integrated approaches on social sector development.
1.4 Cooperative Federalism
However, the lessons from India are particularly encouraging when we consider its
geographical vastness, linguistic diversities, ethnic varieties and cultural hetero-
geneities. This is compounded with historical legacies in terms of efforts on human
development; and regional disparities in leveraging economic opportunities for
wealth creation, skill development, infrastructure and industrialisation. India being
the largest democracy has one of the most decentralised governance architectures
with democratic institutions at all levels. The two major tiers are identified as the
Union Government and the elected Governments in the States with constitutionally
segregated as well as overlapping domains of governance. This brings in additional
complexities in terms of devolution of resources and generation of revenues. The
present Government at the Centre has been credited for greater financial empow-
erment of States and for streamlining indirect tax collection through a common
nation-wide GST. The guiding principle as enunciated by the present Government
is ‘Cooperative Federalism’. There is increased ownership on the SDGs from
various States, even as they adopt effective measures at the level of the States for
social sector development, infrastructure creation and widening economic oppor-
tunities. The governance ideal of ‘Cooperative Federalism’ is being meticulously
pursued by Central ministries in the design of Centrally Sponsored schemes and
programmes given that the State Governments are indispensible partners for the
implementation of such programmes.
India in the spirit of cooperative federalism has been able to systematically
engage its state-level and local level institutions that have resulted in initiates
seeping down to the grassroots (see Box 1). For instance, the BharatNet
Scheme will connect six lakh village panchayats with optical fibre that will store big
data right at the village level. This would bring better monitoring and data analysis
rather than resulting in information getting lost in the aggregations while ensuring
better access to internet and e-Governance facilities at the ground level.
Box 1: Localisation of SDGs in India: Case of Assam

Assam was the first state in India to formally acknowledge and adopt the
ambitious Agenda 2030 in their development plans. Assam set a perfect
example for integrating the needs of the people to their development plan
through all the four pillars of democracy—executive, legislative, although it
needs further strengthening of collaborations at the national and international
level for actually achieving the relevant targets under each goals. For
example, certain initiatives of the State government like the Coalition for
Food and Nutrition Security needs to be strengthened through wider col-
laborations beyond the State.
Assam adopted a convergence policy to integrate Panchayat Level
Development Plans with the existing Gaon Panchayat Development
Programmes. Officials have already been adequately sensitised and the State of
Assam is now focussing on the grassroots by pushing the SDGs at the
Panchayat and the village level, through formulation of Panchayat/Village
level Sustainable Development Plans. In all likelihood, SDGs would be
integrated with state budget and planning. The district manual has been pre-
pared to provide guidelines and define the roles and responsibilities to assist
Districts/Blocks/Panchayat officers for implementing the sustainability agenda
in their respective areas. These integrated actions and collaborative approach
is expected to lead to greater convergence between the policy objective and the
implementation, and would facilitate resource mobilisation for addressing the
local needs. Such grassroots focus by individual States could be game
changing for improving the ‘quality’ of outcomes at the national level.
Source: Chapter 12.
2 Composite Development Strategy
2.1 Eliminating Poverty, Promoting Access and Equity

for Holistic Development
MDG 1 on Poverty was successfully achieved in India, thanks to steady economic

growth in the last couple of decades. The number of absolutely poor people had
been halved from the 1990 level well in time. However, India was home to 263
million poor people as per 2011 census. Among them and many who are few
notches above the national poverty line remain highly vulnerable with widespread
development shortfall across indicators like nutrition (stunting) and health (maternal
and infant mortality) on the one hand and difficult access to quality education and
economic empowerment accentuated by deep entrenched gender disparities (and
also women safety) on the other. Improvement in health would be critically
dependent on the levels of nutrition among all age groups including pregnant
mothers and long term transformations can be triggered through education and
gender empowerment. Improved access to basic needs is the most convincing
approach to poverty reduction in the long run. Hence, a complete society approach
through promotion of access is critical for a composite development strategy.
The wellness of the citizens depends on nutrition security, health care and
opportunities of self-development through education and skilling.1 Nutrition would
also be closely linked with food security in the decades to come (both falling under
SDG 2). To meet the demand for food grains of 1.6 billion people by 2030, India
has launched several social safety net initiatives like the National Food Security Act
for strengthening public distribution system of food grains at subsidised rates to
achieve the target of no hunger. Unfortunately, despite the White, Green and Blue
revolution, India ranks 100 among 113 countries in Global Hunger Index. It is
evident that instead of physical access to food India needs to focus more on eco-
nomic access and availability of food. Formulation of policy, implementation plans
and monitoring needs collective action from all the stakeholders, and effective
coordination and cooperation at all level.2
In the area of health (SDG 3), globally and in India, there has been considerable
progress given predominant focus under the MDGs. Even as some of the older
problems like CDs seem have been tamed to a certain extent (with still very high
risk of new pandemics), the proliferation of NCDs would prove to be difficult
resolve anytime soon. India is already suffering from globally highest levels of
NCDs in many areas like diabetes, cardiac and respiratory diseases, cancers, etc. It
is generally accepted that there is significant need for improvement, particularly in
access to quality health care and prevention. Further, there is need for adopting new
models on healthcare delivery and public health for addressing the direct and
indirect linkages of health with many other sectors. For instance, the deaths due to
road accidents and increasing number of diseases linked to environmental pollution
have not been declining in India and the responsibility not solely lies with the health
sector. The SDGs intend to address such issues of inter-connectedness and inter-
linked challenges of inclusive development. Major issues confronting in health
sector is financial risk in obtaining quality health care. In order to make it inclusive,
India has launched the largest government-funded health insurance programme
globally, namely, Ayushman Bharat (Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana).
To serve the cause of inclusive and equitable education in India (SDG 4),
initiatives like Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and Right to Education have imparted the
desired momentum to the education system in India. Over the years, India has
invested in building infrastructure for expanding the education system, and as a
result, there is significant improvement in the supply in quantitative terms even as
quality parameters remain a cause of concern. It is evident that significant progress
has been made in universalising elementary education through improvements in
enrolment rates, retention and physical infrastructure across the country but much
1
RIS (2016) Health, Nature and Quality of Life.
2
Paroda and Joshi (Chapter 2).
remains to be done in qualitative terms (learning outcomes) as against quantitative

success achieved so far.
Attitude and approach of teachers have to be monitored in order to improve the
learning outcomes. Improvement in teaching methods, raising the bar of student
performance and equal treatment are some of the commonly suggested means in
this direction. Hence, with reference to target 4.c (enhancing quality of teachers)
revamping of teacher education system is required to harness the demographic
dividend. Public schools in India need to improved facilities in terms of proper
infrastructure, MDMS, quality teachers, basic facilities of drinking water and
sanitation, training facilities etc.
Finally, one of the key strengths of the SDGs is its gender-sensitive approach to
the entire range of issues spanning social sector development, economic growth and
sustainable pathways. The stand alone goal SDG 5 specifically anchors the concerns
of gender discrimination. India registers low score on several gender-related indi-
cators. Gender-sensitive approach is central to increasing women participation in
workforce, promoting economic growth and equal pay, poverty alleviation,
inequality, reducing hunger and promoting good health and well-being for all.
However, strong action is needed to address concerns of all kinds of violence and
discrimination against women, abolition of child marriage, etc. Political participation
and space for self assertion in family and society would be critical in every sense.
2.2 Overcoming Structural Issues
With respect to ending all forms of malnutrition by 2030, the long-standing pro-
grammes like the NRHM and ICDS are playing a critical role, reflected in a sig-
nificant improvement in stunting rate from 53% in 1992–93 to 38% in 2015–16.
However, for further improvement in this area, there is need for special attention in
the national policy agenda to take a holistic perspective to promote gender equality,
improve women’s health and focus on female education for addressing malnutri-
tion. It would also be important to remove regional distances with regard to
nutrition outcomes, women and maternal health issues and gender-related sensiti-
sation and empowerment.
Health for all, universal health coverage and public healthcare are interlinked
with each other conditional on affordability and accessibility of primary health
system. The financial challenges in health, particularly, out of pocket expenditure is
extremely high that leads to larger number of people in the lower income strata to
fall into debt trap from which it is difficult to come out. India has in the recent past
significantly stepped up investment in public health and medical insurance for the
vulnerable income group through the AYUSHMAN Bharat programme. The Indian
Systems of Medicine may be more robustly integrated with general health care
through need-based models to address the challenges of affordability, inclusiveness
and wider coverage of health care.
There is urgent need for prioritising gender parity at the level of higher education
for achieving the SDG targets 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3. Strengthening and expansion of
Navodaya Model Schools, KVs, KGBVs and open distance learning schools have
been proposed to promote quality education for all. Coordination and cooperation
among the actors (government, civil society organisations, private sector, com-
munities, students and parents) would facilitate quality education and address the
demands of inter-connectedness. Adequate budget allocation is necessary for
improving the contingent areas like accessibility, quality, outcome and safety as
part of the overall delivery expected from the education system. Use of technology
has to be promoted further to monitor infrastructure in schools and evaluate large
scale data on student profiles and learning outcomes. It is very important to have
standard data and monitoring system to evaluate the learning outcomes periodically.
Also, strengthening of data availability and associated administrative systems is
crucial for review of all the development sectors being discussed here.
India is still grappling with fundamental challenges with regard to
gender-sensitive development models. Sex ratio at birth continues to remain a major
area of concern for some parts of the country. There are attempts to take on this
challenge head on. The concerted campaign for protecting the girl child has
received one of the highest priorities of the Government through the Beti Bachao,
Beti Padhao programme to change the mindset of people towards girl child and take
punitive actions to prevent gender-biased sex selective elimination; ensure survival
and protection of the girl child; and also ensure education of the girl child.
3 Convergence of Actions and Actors: Leadership

and Coordination for SDGs
The Indian Parliament has made a stellar contribution so far in the implementation
of the SDG agenda in India. Proactive participation of the Parliament of India in
deliberating on issues related to the SDGs, the policy coherence and the urgency
reflect highest political ownership for SDGs in India. In all likelihood, continued
leadership of the highest legislative body of the largest democracy would only make
coordination and convergence for SDGs smooth and convincing. The example set
by the Parliament of India is being followed by several State legislatures.
NITI Aayog being the nodal agency for the implementation of the SDGs in
India, has been playing a leading role in the design of localisation strategies and
coordination among ministries and State governments apart from interfacing with
other stakeholders like the civil society, academia and the private sector.
3.1 The Parliament
In general, a parliamentarian’s or a lawmaker’s responsibilities and activities are

informed by their grassroots experience suggesting very vital role in localising the
SDGs. The parliamentarians have clarity of the real needs in their constituencies
through greater public interface, which help them to monitor the development
process in real-time not only in terms of quantity but also in quality. These qualities
of the parliamentarians make them critical actors for implementation of SDGs at the
national level. To fulfil the expectations, the Indian parliamentarians are expected to
lead and steer implementation of the SDGs. Moreover, given their privileged
position as lawmakers and participation in enactment of relevant laws they would
have deeper sense of ownership for legal actions promoting development, inclu-
sivity and sustainability.
Seriousness of Indian Parliamentarians can be judged through their participation
in national and international forum and debates. Many senior parliamentarians and
delegations from the Lower house have attended these meetings and have brought
forward their real-time experience from their constituencies and house debates into
the discourse.3 However, even before the Agenda 2030 came into force, parlia-
mentarians were already facing similar sets of concern, and therefore, ensuring
quality development outcomes has been a long-standing priority in their minds.
One noteworthy innovation of the Indian parliament has been the institution of
the Speaker’s Research Initiative, which provides a forum for the Members of
Parliament to have deeper discourse with experts on various subjects relevant to the
SDGs. The insights and evidence drawn from these interactions go a long way in
informing the debates in the House, and generate greater ownership among law-
makers on the urgency of specific development interventions and the quality of the
outcomes. The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) toolkits are generally useful guide
for parliamentarians to develop their own initiative and share the good practice
models, for emulation by fellow parliamentarians. Robust assessment of the indi-
cators at all levels is possible through IPU-UNDP Self-Assessment Toolkit for
measures adopted independently. Meanwhile, they have the feedback mechanism
available at various levels so quantitative assessment becomes easy and scope of
quality improvement is wide.
3.2 The NITI Aayog
Over the last 3 years, NITI was instrumental as a catalyst, facilitator and enabler for
adoption of the SDGs in India. Within the scope of ongoing policy actions and
initiatives, the States have made considerable progress with regard to the SDGs, often
with the help, advice and direction from the NITI Aayog. In this regard, NITI has
significant role to play in terms of developing analytical tools for analysing progress;
provide extensive knowledge support for devising policy instruments focused on
State-specific issues; identification of priorities to address regional challenges; pro-
motion of cooperative federalism and facilitating institutional capacity building in
States and UTs in order to strengthen their implementation process.
3
See Kaushik.
As elaborated earlier, cross-domain connect and sectoral interlinkages underlines

the necessity for integrated approach in policy planning. There is a tendency of the
Government departments and agencies to function in silos, and the role of NITI
Aayog is crucial to promote strategic inter-departmental approaches. The flagship
programme—Aspirational Districts launched by the NITI Aayog sets an example
for adoption of best practices for rapid transitions in social sector indicators.
The NITI Aayog is also instrumental in providing directions for appropriate
capacity building of government officials and functionaries that may further be
dovetailed to disseminate the core principles of the SDGs. To popularise the idea of
leaving no one behind, there is a need for strategic measures which address local
problems, issues and socio-cultural context.
The NITI Aayog, as the apex government think-tank is expected to play a critical
role in coming up with proposals and guidelines for additional resource generation
at the Centre as well as in the States to achieve the SDGs. This might lead to
evolving a national SDG resourcing and budgeting framework in collaboration with
the Ministry of Finance. NITI Aayog already has considerable experience in
knowledge sharing and enabling mutual learning across states. The NITI Aayog
should nudge the States to explore, identify, and adopt measures on resource effi-
ciency. Going forward, it would be important to give importance to localisation of
SDGs. The NITI Aayog has so far accomplished timely initiatives for sensitisation,
awareness and capacity building, and in the next phase there is scope for assessment
of preparedness and institutional capacities in promoting the SDGs After the
adoption of the NIF and the SDG India Index, there is a new urgency to firm up the
monitoring system where the role of the NITI Aayog continues to be pivotal.
4 The Economic Agenda of Inclusive Development
The economic agenda of inclusive development is the most important enabler for
material well being and distributive justice with no one left behind. The UN adopted
the International Development Strategy in the 1970s with a resolution calling for an
equitable distribution of income and wealth; efforts towards increasing employment;
proving better nutrition and housing with all urgency (General Assembly Resolution
2626 (XXV), 1970). In the subsequent decades ILO and the World Bank had
emphasised on the need for having employment generation at the core of
anti-poverty strategies (ILO 1970, 1971, 1972 and 1973; and Chenery et al. 1974).
Globally prevalent inequalities received welcome attention in the form of NIEO and
bringing to the fore issues affecting the developing countries. The Lima Declaration
(UNIDO 1975) identified industrialisation in developing and less developed coun-
tries as the most needed tool to create employment and generate income. The
Tripartite World conference on ‘Employment, Income Distribution and Social
Progress, and the International Division of Labour,’ mandated inclusion of ‘basic
needs’ as an explicit goal in the national development plans (ILO 1976). The sub-
sequent rejoinder came from the World Bank with its support for ‘basic needs’ as the
core strategy for poverty elimination (Streeten and Haq 1977). The chorus was also
joined by development agencies like the WHO through its World Health Assembly
in 1979 desiring ‘health for all’ by the end of the century. The economic pillar of
Agenda 2030 draws its roots in the above and the relevance of such instruments have
only grown over time even as realities have emerged to be far more complex.
Reduction of poverty has come along with expansion of productive activities in the
economy; but inequalities in income and access; and transaction costs have multi-
plied globally. With rising complexities, income-based measures of development
have become poor indicators of development (see Box 2).
Box 2: GDP and Well-being

Since its launch as a measurement tool, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has
attracted major debates on its relevance for measuring well-being. GDP was
initially developed in the USA in the 1930s and 1940s when the world was
into major economic recessionary trend owing to two world wars and the
Great Depression. GDP estimates were used by the US government to justify
policies and budgets aimed at bringing the country out of the intense
depression (Costanza et al. 2009). The conceptualised use of GDP was further
strengthened as a result of Bretton Woods Conference and later through
Washington Consensus. Thus, it became the sine qua non for a measure of
national economic well-being, albeit the fact that it was never designed to
refer to well-being. In 1934 itself, Simon Kuznets, the chief architect of the
USA national accounting system and GDP, cautioned against equating GDP
growth with economic or social well-being (Kuznets 1934). Nevertheless, the
use (or misuse) of GDP as an indicator for gauging state of well-being and
development has been continued ever since. However, in recent times, the
shortcomings of GDP as a measure of well-being have become even more
striking owing to rising income inequalities, rapidly evolving technologies,
demographic strife and shifts, and the urgent need to reduce pressure on the
physical environment (Stiglitz et al. 2009; Blanke 2016).
Source: Kumar, A., Saha, S. and Bhatia, D., Measuring Well-Being: A
Survey of Literature and Initiatives. Health, Nature and Quality of Life, RIS
p.95.
4.1 Sustaining Agriculture and Promoting Industrialisation

for Employment and Reducing Inequality
India has come a long way from being food scare to a food surplus nation. The
pressure on agriculture still continues primarily on three fronts: the challenge of
feeding rising population; supporting disproportionately large agricultural
livelihoods, still at bare subsistence level; and mitigating impact of climate change.
In terms of share of population dependent on agriculture and the size of the rural
informal economy, Agriculture remains the most significant and politically sensitive
sector of the economy. Despite technological interventions, productivity has
remained low due to small size farms and high concentration of labour. Naturally,
the objective of poverty reduction In India involves special attention to increasing
productivity and income of small farms. To further ensure India’s preparedness
towards achieving SDG 2, different policies and programmes are adopted like
promoting contract farming, introduction of reforms in APMC markets, linking
farmers to markets, promoting retail chains etc. But these are not sufficient and need
further investment in the agriculture sector in order to fast track eliminating both
poverty and hunger as well as to ensure nutrition and environmental security for all.
The recent attention given to support prices from Government and income transfers
to farmers is expected to positively influence the outcomes.
Employment challenges for the Indian economy have deepened due to prolonged
stagnation of the industry in terms of its share in the economy. As is well known,
India failed to expand its diverse industrial base and leverage labour-intensive
manufacturing, first by missing the opportunity when rest of Asia took to manu-
facturing; and later by failing to adopt appropriate trade policy mix to integrate with
Global Value Chains. Given, India’s late entry, however could to an extent facil-
itated by technological competence in certain sectors. Innovation and
technology-driven industrialisation has been argued as an appropriate strategy in the
Indian context in order to improve competitiveness of industrial products and
sustaining industrialisation per se. Broad-based industrialisation would be helpful in
creating better quality employment. While leading services industries in India have
created white collar jobs, India needs to create jobs in the category of low-skill as
well as median skills. Industrialisation is important instrument in this regard.
The NITI Aayog of the Government of India, along with some of the leading
infrastructure ministries have come up with several strategies on India’s future
course in digital economy, sustainable urbanisation and transportation, circular
economy, renewable energy among other areas. While apparently these may not
provide any clear idea about an evolving industrial strategy, the multipronged
policy approach would be much relevant in the twenty-first century. The ‘Make in
India’ programme launched in 2014 widened the opportunities for industrialisation
in India by identifying priority sectors and strengthening policies apart from
building on some of the older sector focussed policies initiated a few years before.
There was a shift in approach from economic zones to Industrial Corridors (com-
bining industrialisation with urbanisation and infrastructure development);
accompanied with focus on Start-Ups; Ease of Doing Business etc. Policies have
played an important role in promoting industrialisation in India as in the case of
pharmaceuticals, automobile/auto-components, and more recently in mobile
handset manufacturing.
4.2 Innovation and Supporting Technology Facilitation

Mechanism (TFM)
India vehemently articulated at UN and other platforms that finance and technology
would be the most critical pillars for implementing this agenda across the SDGs.
The developing countries by and large are at serious disadvantage with regard to
critical technologies in the traditional domains like healthcare, medical devices,
sustainable agriculture etc. and in the non-conventional areas like sustainable
energy, waste management, emission control. Institutional mechanisms at the
global are inadequate to meet the full-scale requirements or ensure timely delivery
in the face of market failures and IPR barriers. India’s own technological efforts
have been impressive in some of these areas in terms of addressing local needs and
cost-effectiveness, but are way below optimum. India’s own technology assess-
ments have indicated gaps in terms of sustainability needs.
Availability of appropriate technologies would significantly impact achievement
of SDGs and developing countries expect institutional mechanisms to widen their
technology choices. India along with Brazil and France and with support from G77
and China was instrumental in the negotiations at the UN to the launch of the TFM
under the Agenda 2030. The idea of TFM is encouraging as it suggests partnership
between North–South, South–South and Public–private collaborations. In support
of SDGs in fellow developing countries, India can initiate capacity building projects
in areas of technology assessment, acquisition, development and transfer. India is
committed to South-South and Triangular Development partnerships and with
partner countries in the South should make efforts to strengthen the bargaining
position on institutions governing innovation and knowledge sharing to overcome
challenges imposed by the global IP regime. India can also share its experience on
indigenous technology development and frugal innovations.
Since the last decade, to promote research, knowledge creation and collaboration
in specific priority areas, India has introduced several S&T missions that are meant
to produce technological solutions and innovations. The technology missions cur-
rently under operation by the DST include Water Technology Initiative Programme;
Clean Energy Research Initiative; Nano-Science and Technology Mission; and
National Super Computing Mission. DST has introduced the mega scientific mis-
sion on Cyber-Physical Systems.
For the dissemination of agriculture-related knowledge among farmers,
strengthening of ICT enabled technologies and improvement in connectivity is
much needed. Therefore, adoptions of advance technologies, that can promote
diversification of food crops, require huge investment in agricultural R&D.
However, the challenges ahead in this area are reprioritisation of research agenda to
achieve the targets under SDGs 1 and 2. Due to land and natural resource degra-
dation, the farming land in India is suffering from deficiency of micro-nutrients.
Initiatives like Soil Health Card are very helpful and need further strengthening.
There is need to develop detailed plans based on situation-specific use of land for
different agro-ecological regions. There is need to increase investment on smart
agriculture for combating climate; development and dissemination of

drought-tolerant, submergence-tolerant, salinity-tolerant and aerobic stress-tolerant
varieties of crops; and mainstreaming climate and agriculture-related education and
bottoms-up approach for accelerating growth in the agricultural sector.
Given the changing scenario due to technological breakthroughs, India needs a
transformative approach in dealing with the policy dilemma and address the issue of
inter-linkages. For example, the SDG targets in health sector need robust solutions
to overcome the concerns on financing healthcare and technological bottlenecks in
the Indian context. Cost-effective technologies need to be adopted in the provision
of healthcare. At present, Government of India is trying to adopt e-health and digital
health technologies.
India’s innovation landscape has witnessed positive changes with business R&D
picking up. India has also seen spontaneous supply of cost-effective innovations
suited to local needs driven by individual innovators often outside formal inno-
vation support systems. However, institutional links within the National Innovation
System still remains poor across technological domains. India’s efforts at PPPs in
R&D and explicit support for the private sector to come up with technology
development and commercialisation have not contributed much towards forging
widespread institutional collaborations. Proximity of public-funded institutions,
private R&D establishments and firms, even though apparent in some cases, did not
lead to well-developed innovation clusters. In order to widely catalyse innovation
(to cater to gaping needs of development and promote industrialisation) India needs
to greatly strengthen its NIS.
4.3 Inclusive and Sustainable Urbanisation
Metropolitan cities in India attract most investments from the country and abroad,
are major destinations for the migrant workforce. Lack of jobs in non-agriculture
sector, particularly, in smaller towns, has led to the rise in rural–urban migration.
This accentuates the exclusionary tendency because of the inability to absorb rural
migrants; lack of dynamism in small and medium towns; and unguided emergence
of large number of new urban clusters that may not have significant industrial
activity or infrastructure; and would lack adequate amenities.
Forecasts of high growth of urban areas in India have to be seen with a sceptic’s
lens. Governments have resource limitations towards supporting large scale
urbanisation in developing countries as is evident in the case of India. Resource
mobilisation from various sources—financial institutions and international donors
has traditionally been pursued for urban development. Privatisation,
community-based projects and variants of PPP are being adopted to reduce the
burden on budget of urban local bodies. Support needs to be extended to potential
small and medium-sized urban settlements to help them generate employment, and
establish strong links with adjoining rural areas.
Under the mission ‘Housing for All’ of the Government of India subsidies are
being directed to house construction by or for the poor and vulnerable population.
There is a need to resolve the land ownership issue for the slum dwellers in order to
allow rapid progress under Housing for All. Attempts have been made to provide
plot with land ownership to the poor and shelter-less to make the mission more
inclusive. Basic facilities have to be given priority while developing the plan for
urbanisation and target the inclusivity in SDG 11. Further, it is necessary to ensure
community participation for developing master plans for urbanisation.
Socio-economic challenges, infrastructural bottlenecks and specificities of regional
economies need to be taken into account while forming plans for the growth of
small urban centers.
To ensure the accomplishment of SDG 11, it is important to develop synergies
among national and international actors including multilateral institutions and
national nodal agencies for developing monitoring and evaluation system. NITI
Aayog, in its previous assessment in 2018 of the country’s performance with regard
to sustainable urbanisation, has not included all the indicators laid down by
IAEG-SDGs and the MoSPI. Thus, it is also crucial to adopt a more comprehensive
scale for performance analysis.
4.4 Addressing Inequality
There has been a persistent concern on rising income inequality in India, particu-
larly since the beginning of the economic reforms in 1991. The rising wealth
imbalance is addressed in SDG 10 to ensure inclusion of the marginalised and
reduce inequalities within and among the countries. The chapter attempted to
examine the causes of the rising inequality in India at the sub-national level. Trade
liberalisation and infrastructure development are chosen as policy instruments that
can impact inequality. Owing to opening up of the economy, the output/income of
the States has increased rapidly especially after 1993 compared to the previous three
decades. This economic growth seems to have been accompanied by increased
income inequality in Indian States.
It is observed that average inequality in Indian States in terms of GINI measure
has increased from 0.26 in 1994 to 0.29 in 2005 and further to 0.30 in 2012. Rising
inequality could significantly impact macroeconomic stability and eventually eco-
nomic growth. It is evident from the analysis that the average real per capita income
of the states has also increased 2.4 times from 1994 to 2012. The pace of the growth
of Indian states during 2005–2012 was much higher than 1994–2005. It is found
that structural transformation and trade liberalisation caused inequality to increase
in Indian states.
Further, the results indicate negative relationship between GVA share of agri-
culture and allied activities and inequality; and the relationship has become stronger
over time. Correspondingly, there was a positive relationship between GVA share
of the industry and State-level income inequality between 1994 and 2005. In case of
services, the trend is positive overtime between 1994 and 2012. However, the
authors suggest caution on the apparent evidence on infrastructure development
leading to rise in inequality on account of the presence of outliers. This possibly
indicates disparities among State in terms of their ability to positively leverage
infrastructure development.
5 Future Agenda for SDG Indicators
As highlighted earlier, an initial set of 232 global indicators (excluding duplica-

tions), as evolved by the Inter-Agency and Expert Group (IAEG-SDG), under the
auspices of the UN Statistical Commission, has been adopted by the UN General
Assembly in July 2017 for global monitoring, review and follow up on the SDGs.
However, bulk of the theoretical work on the quality standards is yet to be carried
out on many indicators even as countries are expected to follow the principles
underlying UN-mandated indicators in their own efforts to align, select and develop
national indicators. India has finalised a National Indicator Framework for moni-
toring of SDGs and has undertaken a procedurally sound mechanism to involve
stakeholders and implementing agencies. Realising the fact that the national indi-
cator framework needs regular review and updation as and when new policy
intervention takes place or new statistical methodology become available, the
Government of India constituted a High-Level Steering Committee (HLSC) for
periodical review and refining of the NIF. The Committee is chaired by the Chief
Statistician of India; with Secretaries from various other Ministries as members.
The Committee is mandated to review the NIF; including refinement of the indi-
cators from time to time. It is envisaged that the NIF will also help in the
outcome-based monitoring and reporting on the progress of SDGs at the national
level. The Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI) has also
constituted a Technical Advisory Committee under the Director General, MoSPI to
provide necessary inputs to HLSC in discharging its mandate.
Notably, there are certain targets under the SDGs that have to be fulfilled before
the year 2030 and 21 targets are such that are slated for achievement almost
immediately by the year 2020. Since, India is also committed to follow the inter-
national obligation for successful and timely implementation of SDGs, to introduce
novelty in the entire approach on SDG monitoring, Chapter 9 proposes 50 key
performance indicators covering all the 17 goals for monitoring and evaluation of
SDGs at national level. The chosen indicators are mainly outcome-based and
broadly absorb the understanding of the Agenda 2030 at the national level. Further,
the study was also intended to encourage and guide all stakeholders involved in the
preparation/revision of the NIF and articulate the conceptual underpinnings of such
measurement frameworks to aid timely implementation of the SDGs in the national
context. The proposed KPIs as outlined in the paper are not biased towards any
specific goal. Rather the formulation depends on the relevance of the indicators in
the Indian context, as some of the targets under the SDGs may have relatively less
importance for India like targets seeking attention and specific action from the
developed countries. Also, the challenges associated with the cost of collection of
data have been kept in mind while proposing the 50 indicators for efficiency and
sustenance of the SDG monitoring process.
The dynamics of the evolvement process of global indicator set and its classi-
fication into tiers by UN Statistical Commission is not comprehensive enough
towards timely achievement of goals. Today, the global reporting on the SDG
progress is done only on a limited set of Tier I indicators which by no means can be
considered as measuring the scope and aspiration of the 2030 Agenda set by the
heads of state across the world. Hence, it is in the interest of global community to
move fast on the methodological development of tier III indicators and strengthen
capacities of the national statistical offices by investing in human resource devel-
opment or through investing in latest technology and necessary statistical infras-
tructure for compiling and reporting on the tier II indicators.
However, instead of taking this route the move is on pushing proxy indicators
for the tier II and tier III indicators, e.g. Total Official Support for Sustainable
Development in the global set which has been evolved by think-tanks like OECD in
the name of bridging the gap between the indicator set and financing. The word
“total” has been a matter of much criticism on a plethora of issues. The developing
nations have to remain vigilant and careful for countering any such move. They
should benefit from wider consultations among the national governments and other
development partners/stakeholders for evolving appropriate indicators and
methodological development for utilising 2020 debate of the UN Statistical
Commission/HLPF when the global indicator framework will undergo a compre-
hensive review.
After three years of SDG implementation the national emphasis has now been on
strengthening the capacities of the national system for implementation and service
delivery mechanism of various development programmes and measurement of the
progress to meet international obligation of achieving the objectives of the 2030
Agenda. The national statistical office (NSO) needs to put all its efforts for data
disaggregation in order to fulfill the commitment that no one will be left behind.
This will require the capacity enhancement of national system through investment
in human resources as well as improving the statistical infrastructure both at the
centre and state level. Integration of data available through non-traditional sources
like mobile phones, satellite imagery, and social media, etc., with private sector
partnership will also be necessary to timely expand official data base of good
quality to meet the commitments made under the 2030 Agenda.
6 India’s Global and Regional Partnership for SDGs
SDG 17 articulates the ambitious challenge for countries to form partnerships

among actors at the global, regional, national and local levels that are inclusive and
create a seamless flow of efforts directed to address the SDGs. The thrust of the
Indian government, along with the role of multiple stakeholders including acade-
mia, civil society, private sector, development organisations and individual enti-
ties’, collectively posit India at an ideal position to share its experiences and form
partnerships aimed to achieve Agenda 2030. India brings with it a unique set of
experiences wherein it has been able to benefit from its democratic framework to
ensure the implementation of policies aligned with the SDGs as well as engaged
various stakeholders recognising the need for collective effort and an integrated
approach.
In the face of borderless and common challenges ranging from climate change to
disruptive technologies, from pandemics to migration, the need of the hour is to
foster partnerships rather than taking a unilateral silo-based approach to bring
forward diverse experiences and share tailor-made know-how. The rationale of a
partnership-based approach is that it is able to capitalise on comparative advantages
and capacities of each actor, engage all stakeholders and share relevant and efficient
technologies furthering the aim of a sustainable future.
The recently concluded Second High-Level United Nations Conference on
South-South Cooperation (BAPA+40) called upon all countries and relevant
stakeholders to strengthen the efforts in the implementation of Agenda 2030
through South-South and triangular cooperation. The outcome document of BAPA
+40 highlights the potential role of triangular cooperation as a means to promote
sustainable agriculture, link developing countries into the global value chains,
address common challenges and financial needs for development (UNGA 2019).
The role of South-South and triangular cooperation for the promotion of SDGs
stands unique towards facilitating flow of knowledge, technology, and finances.
India’s cooperation with China for peace-building in Afghanistan, India-Japan
cooperation to increase Sri Lanka’s port’s container volume-boosting transportation
in South Asia, India-UAE and India-Japan cooperation in Africa and more recently
India–US agreement to deepen triangular cooperation in Asia and Africa cooper-
ation focusing primarily on agriculture, connectivity, trade, health, amongst others
highlight the need for a collective approach to address the interlinked nature of
sustainability in the various developmental goals of all countries (MEA 2019).
The India–Brazil–South Africa (IBSA) partnership and the IBSA fund is a
noteworthy example of three developing countries coming together to support other
developing countries in meeting distinct development challenges and global com-
mitments. The IBSA Fund in partnership with the United Nations Office for
South-South Cooperation assists developing countries, primarily Least Developed
Countries (LDCs) and Post Conflict Reconstruction and Development (PCRD)
countries to fight poverty and hunger (MEA 2018). The fund operating through a
demand-driven approach has contributed approximately USD 39 million partner-
ings with 19 developing countries and implemented 26 projects (MEA 2018). It
presents itself as a unique case of South-South cooperation, wherein the IBSA
countries continue forward their development trajectories and provide experiential
and financial support for development in the spirit of Southern solidarity.
India’s experience to meet its commitments under Agenda 2030 can positively
contribute towards the policy processes of other countries and take forward a
collective voice at the international fora that is accommodative of the Southern

approach to development. India has also released a draft Three-Year Action Agenda
(2017–2020) and has committed to present its Voluntary National Review during
the 2020 United Nations High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development
(Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations 2019).
At the regional level, India hosted the second BRICS Women Parliamentarians
Forum in August 2016 that deliberated on issues pertaining to the implementation
of the SDGs and the role of women as facilitators. It also hosted the South Asian
Speakers’ Summit on SDGs organised in February 2017, and adopted the Indore
Declaration focusing on the need for harmonising development practices with
special emphasis on the protection of environment and underscoring the impera-
tives of SDGs for eliminating poverty.
To ensure that no one is left behind, it is critical for countries to have effective
mechanisms that allow for policies to percolate through all institutional and gov-
ernment levels for development to actualise at the grassroots. This demands the
need to engage various actors, primarily the civil society organisations (CSOs)
including universities and think-tanks that act as a conduit to ensure the success of
initiatives. India has also been able to tap into the potential of its civil society
organisation and engage multiple stakeholders through its platforms like the Forum
for Indian Development Cooperation (FIDC). CSOs play a crucial role at the local
level contributing to innovation and implementation, spreading awareness and
knowledge and hence are important for the successful performance of programmes
and policies. The role of CSOs towards enabling SDGs working simultaneously
with various stakeholders allows for deepened cooperation. The case of Indian CSO
PRATHAM in creating capacity for assessing efficacy of education policies through
the use of the instrument of ASER (Annual Status of Education Report) across
Pakistan, Kenya, Tanzania, Mali, Mexico amongst others is one successful example
of a plural approach towards policy evaluation (Chaturvedi et al. 2016).
Regionally, CSOs can play a critical role in facilitating and spreading awareness
at the ground level on cross-border development projects such as those initiated by
India with Nepal and Bangladesh, to boost connectivity. CSOs ideally represent
popular concerns and ensure that knowledge emanating at the operational level is
absorbed in the policy-making process of international development. However,
presently various restrictions are imposed on Indian CSOs such as control mech-
anisms by the Reserve Bank of India that limit the role of CSOs geographically
(Chaturvedi et al. 2016). Various research and consultations undertaken by FIDC
propose that unique identification can be allocated to CSOs that can bring financial
transparency and regulate the working of non-governmental organisations
(Chaturvedi et al. 2016).
India’s distinct experience, through its cooperative federalism approach and
platforms like FIDC, highlight the need to create linkages between institutions and
actors that facilitate an uninterrupted circulation of knowledge and technical
expertise. At the regional and global level, the role of India through South-South
Cooperation and memberships at platforms like Shanghai Cooperation
Organisation, BRICS and BIMSTEC to name a few, is to encourage cooperation

amongst all actors in this regard.
References
Blanke, J. (2016). What is GDP, and how are we Misusing It? World Economic Forum.
Chaturvedi, S., Chakrabarti, M., & Sharma, P. (2016). FIDC regional consultation at Jaipur.
Policy Brief No. 6, Forum for Indian Development Cooperation (FIDC), Research and
Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), February. Retrieved from https://fidc.ris.
org.in/sites/default/files/6.pdf.
Chenery, H. B., Ahluwalia, M. S., & Bell, C. G. (1974). Redistribution with growth. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Costanza, R., Hart, M., Talberth, J., & Posner, S. (2009). Beyond GDP: The need for new
measures of progress. The Pardee papers.
ILO. (1970). Towards full employment: A programme for Colombia. Geneva: International Labour
Organisation (ILO).
ILO. (1971). Matching employment opportunities and expectations: A programme of action for
Ceylone. Geneva: International Labour Organisation (ILO).
ILO. (1972). Employment, income and equality: A strategy for increasing productive employment
in Kenya. Geneva: International Labour Organisation (ILO).
ILO. (1973). Sharing in development: A programme of development, equity and growth for the
Phillippines. International Labour Organisation (ILO), Geneva.
ILO. (1976). Employment, growth and basic needs: A one world problem. International Labour
Organisation (ILO), Geneva.
Kumar, A., Saha, S., & Bhatia, D., Measuring well-being: A survey of literature and
initiatives. Health, Nature and Quality of Life, RIS, p. 95.
Kuznets, S. (1934). National Income, 1929–1932. Senate Document. No. 124, 73rd US Congress
2d session. USA.
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). (2018). IBSA declaration on South-South Cooperation. MEA,
Government of India, Pretoria, June 4. Retrieved from: https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-
documents.htm?dtl/29955/IBSA_Declaration_on_SouthSouth_Cooperation.
Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). (2019). India and United States renew Triangular
Development Cooperation in Asia and Africa. MEA, New Delhi: Government of India,
March 29. Retrieved from: https://mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/31189/India+and
+United+States+Renew+Triangular+Development+Cooperation+in+Asia+and+Africa.
Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations. (2019). Letter from the Permanent Mission of
India. Government of India, No.PMI/NY/C(AS)/2019, April 24. Retrieved from: https://
sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/22523India_VNR_ECOSOC_NV.pdf.
Stiglitz, J. E., Amartya S., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2009). Report by the commission on the measurement
of economic performance and social progress. 291 pp.
Streeten, P., & ul Haq. M. (1977). International implications for donor countries and agencies for
meeting basic human needs. Basic needs paper No. 3, World Bank.
UNIDO. (1975). Lima declaration and plan of action on industrial development and co-operation.
Second general conference of UN Industrial Development Organisation.
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2019). Buenos Aires outcome document of the
second High-level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation—Draft resolution
submitted by the President of the general assembly. UNDP, Seventy-third session, A/73/L.80,
April 18. Retrieved from https://undocs.org/en/A/73/L.80.

2030 Agenda and India: Moving From Quantity To Quality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2030 Agenda and India: Moving From Quantity To Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

South Asia Economic and Policy Studies

2030 Agenda and

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15400

Sabyasachi Saha Prativa Shaw

2030 Agenda and India:

Sabyasachi Saha Prativa Shaw

ISSN 2522-5502 ISSN 2522-5510 (electronic)

This volume emerges out of RIS work programme on Sustainable Development

1 Introduction: Sustainable Development Goals and India . . . . . . . . 1

Part I Thematic Domain

Part II Role of Actors and Partnership

Part III Emerging Paradigm and Global Partnership

About the Editors

Prof. Sachin Chaturvedi is Director General at the Research and Information

Dr. Sabyasachi Saha is an Assistant Professor at the Research and Information

Supriya Khound Centre for Sustainable Developmental Goals, Assam

Sachin Chaturvedi, T. C. James, Sabyasachi Saha and Prativa Shaw

Abstract The concept of sustainable development ﬁnds echo in the writings of

The concept of ‘sustainability’ has been built in as a paradigm to measure devel-

S. Chaturvedi T. C. James (&) S. Saha P. Shaw

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 1

Affects the Future Improvement of Society, published in 1798 (Malthus 1926).

The United Nations member countries negotiated a global agenda on sustainable

2 The Path Towards ‘Convergence’ for Achieving

Application of MDGs led to a growing realisation that singular target-oriented

However, the exercise of identifying the 17 goals and numerous underlying

3 Quantity to Quality: India’s Emphasis on ‘Convergence’

As the centre of the global economy is increasingly shifting ‘south-wards’ with

4 Layout and Scope of the Volume

R. S. Paroda and P. K. Joshi

Abstract Irrespective of high economic growth the agriculture sector in India is at

Keywords Food security Land reforms Water management Sustainable

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 17

2 Status of Development Goals

2.1 Poverty and Food Security

2.2 Hunger and Nutrition

2.3 Land Degradation

Land degradation refers to a temporary or permanent decline in ecosystem function

2.4 Climate Risks and Agriculture

The adoption of conservation agriculture technologies (such as zero tillage,

Improved technologies have a key role to accomplish SDGs. India witnessed a

3.1 Genetic Enhancement

3.2 Natural Resource Management

Sustainable management of natural resources has huge potential for contributing

3.3 Farm Mechanization

In this section, the role of policies in achieving SDGs is outlined in terms of

4.1 Role of Social Safety Net Programs

Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)-2006,

4.2 Targeting Less Favoured Regions

4.3 Enhancing Farmers’ Income

Institutions do play an important role in improving governance, optimizing resource

5.1 Implications for Agricultural R&D

Agricultural research can signiﬁcantly contribute in accomplishing SDGs. India

5.2 Land Lease Reforms

Land policies do play an important role in technology adoption, investment to

5.3 Agricultural Financing

5.4 Leveraging Agricultural Markets

6 Climate Action: Technologies, Policies and Institutions

The impact of climate change on food production, employment generation and

6.1 Climate Risks in Achieving SDGs

6.2 India’s Preparedness to Climate Change

India’s preparedness to mitigate climate change impact is revealed by its following

potential; volatility in carbon market; and non-compliance of Green Climate Fund