Comparing the change in HDI and EQI Score, Mukherjee and
Chakraborty (2007) observed that for Karnataka, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu
and UP a comparable level Ofchange in EQI score is observed at various
level Ofchanges in HDI. Gujarat and Orissa have achieved a comparable
level Ofchange in EQI, but with a positive and negative change in HDI
respectively. For Orissa and West Bengal, though change in HDI is
negative, they have witnessed positive changes in EQL The opposite is
true for Bihar, Punjab and Haryana. MP and Kerala witnessed a
comparable level of change in HDI score.
Table 8: Economic Growth, Change in Environmental Quality and
Change in Human Development
|
States |
Average GSDP |
Average GSDP (in Rs. Lakh) |
Annual |
Difference in |
Difference in |
|
(1) |
(2) |
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
(6) |
|
Andhra Pradesh |
6,312,953 |
7,707,798 |
6.7 |
0.036 |
0.059 |
|
Bihar__________ |
2,421,359 |
2,832,840 |
5.2 |
-0.025 |
0.014 |
|
Gujarat________ |
5,961,594 |
7,451,784 |
7.4 |
0.019 |
0.069 |
|
Haryana______ |
2,429,864 |
3,011,469 |
7.2 |
-0.002 |
0.143 |
|
Karnataka |
4,523,392 |
6,225,243 |
10.6 |
0.029 |
0.076 |
|
Kerala_________ |
2,887,629 |
3,520,175 |
6.6 |
0.039 |
0.056 |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
4,066,861 |
4,870,160 |
6.0 |
0.004 |
0.060 |
|
Maharashtra |
12,415,228 |
15,502,773 |
7.4 |
0.037 |
0.074 |
|
Orissa_________ |
1,912,394 |
2,212,770 |
4.9 |
0.014 |
-0.014 |
|
Punjab_______ |
3,215,978 |
3,909,562 |
6.5 |
-0.021 |
0.023 |
|
Rajasthan |
3,914,937 |
5,151,492 |
9.1 |
0.029 |
0.120 |
|
Tamil Nadu |
6,498,542 |
8,283,152 |
8.1 |
0.030 |
0.108 |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
8,787,154 |
10,249,185 |
5.1 |
0.030 |
0.088 |
|
West Bengal |
5,933,398 |
7,832,031 |
9.3 |
0.014 |
-0.003 |
Source: EPWRF (2003)
Note: * - implies growth rate of a state = (ln(GSDP Period A)-ln(GSDP Period B))∕3*100
$ - Difference in Environmental Quality Index (EQI) Score has been computed
from Column 9 (Table 4) - Column 9 (Table 3).
# - Difference in Human Development Index (HDI) Score has been computed
from Table 5, Column 8 - Column 7.
42
The changing dynamics gives rise to a slanting N-shaped
relationship between change in HDI and change in EQL This particular
shape of the curve originates from the similarity in incremental HD or
EQ benefits experienced by dissimilar States in terms of EQ or HD
achievements. In other words, the result indicates that state specific
factors have a major role to play in determining the EQ scenario.
5. Discussion
A number of developing countries located in Asia, Africa and Latin
America witnessed economic stagnation or crisis during eighties, and
had to undergo structural adjustment in the subsequent period, either
unilaterally or as part of policy package offered by external development
agencies. Given the focus on growth in the short run, many developing
countries created little room to accommodate environmental and natural
resource concerns in their economic policy. A similar picture emerges if
one analyses the cross-region scenario within a country as well. However,
despite the attempts by various studies to evaluate different
environmental parameters, determination of a composite overall
environmental quality index is still lacking. The current study makes an
attempt to bridge that gap by constructing an index of EQ for Indian
States by using 63 environmental indicators.
Based on inter- and intra-sectoral differences in economic
activities, different States in India in the post-1991 period have different
levels Ofstress on their natural resources. To understand the impacts
Ofeconomic growth on environmental quality, the current analysis first