Skip to main content

blog archive

Show more

India’s Development Journey: A Comparative Analysis of Literacy, Education, Nutrition, and Health (1970–2020)

 


Introduction

India has made significant strides in literacy, education, nutrition, and healthcare since independence. However, when compared with regions like East Asia (China, South Korea, Thailand), Southeast Asia (Indonesia), and Central Asia, as well as Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), India’s progress has been uneven. While some Indian states rival global leaders, others lag behind even the poorest African nations.

This blog compares India’s performance across four key metrics—literacy, primary school enrolment, infant mortality, and child nutrition—over 1970, 1990, 2005, and 2020. It identifies why India underperformed relative to peers and suggests remedial measures. Finally, it highlights the top 5 and bottom 5 Indian states (with populations over 25 million) to showcase regional disparities.

1. Comparative Performance: India vs. the World

A. Literacy Rate (%)

Region1970199020052020
India~34~52~65~77
Sub-Saharan Africa~27~50~62~67
China~55~78~91~97
South Korea~88~98~99~99
Thailand~79~93~95~94
Indonesia~56~82~90~96
Central Asia~75~98~99~99

Key Insight:

  • India started low but improved, yet remained far behind East/Southeast Asia.

  • China and Korea achieved near-universal literacy by 1990 through strong public education drives.

  • India’s slow progress was due to gender disparities, rural-urban gaps, and weak adult literacy programs.

B. Primary School Enrolment (Gross %)

Region1970199020052020
India~65~85~95~98
Sub-Saharan Africa~50~70~85~90
China~80~98~99~99
South Korea~90~100~100~100
Thailand~75~95~98~99
Indonesia~70~95~97~99
Central Asia~90~98~99~99

Key Insight:

  • India caught up in enrolment by 2020, but dropout rates remained high (~30% before secondary school).

  • SSA improved but still faced teacher shortages and poor infrastructure.

  • China and Korea ensured universal primary education early through state-led investments.

C. Infant Mortality Rate (per 1,000 live births)

Region1970199020052020
India~120~80~50~28
Sub-Saharan Africa~130~100~80~50
China~70~40~20~6
South Korea~45~10~5~2
Thailand~70~30~15~7
Indonesia~90~50~30~20
Central Asia~60~40~25~15

Key Insight:

  • India reduced IMR significantly, but China and Thailand did better due to stronger rural healthcare.

  • SSA improved but remained high due to HIV/AIDS and weak health systems.

  • Korea’s rapid decline was due to universal healthcare and sanitation reforms.

D. Nutrition (Stunting % in Children <5)

Region1970*199020052020
India~60~55~48~35
Sub-Saharan Africa~45~40~38~30
China~40~25~15~8
Thailand~35~20~12~10
Indonesia~50~40~35~30

Key Insight:

  • India’s stunting rates remained alarmingly high due to poverty, poor maternal health, and ineffective food distribution.

  • China and Thailand succeeded via agrarian reforms, school meal programs, and community nutrition initiatives.

2. Why Did India Underperform?

1. Low Public Spending on Health & Education

  • India spends ~3% of GDP on education (vs. China’s ~4%).

  • Healthcare spending is just 1.2% of GDP (vs. Thailand’s 3.8%).

2. Inequality in Access

  • Rural-urban divide: Villages lack schools, hospitals, and sanitation.

  • Gender gap: Female literacy in Bihar (~50%) is half of Kerala’s (~95%).

  • Caste discrimination: Marginalized groups face exclusion from services.

3. Weak Implementation of Schemes

  • Mid-Day Meal Scheme: Leakages and corruption reduce effectiveness.

  • ICDS (Nutrition): Poor monitoring leads to low coverage.

  • Ayushman Bharat: Many rural poor remain unaware of health insurance.

4. Poor Sanitation & Healthcare Access

  • Open defecation contributes to child malnutrition.

  • Shortage of doctors in rural areas (1 doctor per 11,000 people in UP vs. 1:1,000 in China).

5. Population Pressure

  • High fertility rates in Bihar, UP strain resources (e.g., overcrowded schools).

3. Top 5 & Bottom 5 Indian States (2020)

Top Performers

  1. Kerala (Literacy: 94%, IMR: 6, Stunting: 20%)

    • Why? Strong public health, women’s empowerment, and decentralized governance.

  2. Tamil Nadu (Literacy: 80%, IMR: 18, Stunting: 25%)

    • Why? Effective mid-day meals and healthcare schemes.

  3. Maharashtra (Literacy: 83%, IMR: 22, Stunting: 28%)

    • Why? Better infrastructure and urban healthcare.

  4. Punjab (Literacy: 80%, IMR: 21, Stunting: 25%)

    • Why? High agricultural prosperity and education focus.

  5. Himachal Pradesh (Literacy: 86%, IMR: 20, Stunting: 22%)

    • Why? Strong social welfare policies.

Bottom Performers

  1. Bihar (Literacy: 62%, IMR: 35, Stunting: 42%)

    • Why? Weak governance, poverty, and high fertility.

  2. Uttar Pradesh (Literacy: 70%, IMR: 38, Stunting: 40%)

    • Why? Overpopulation, poor healthcare access.

  3. Madhya Pradesh (Literacy: 73%, IMR: 43, Stunting: 36%)

    • Why? Tribal marginalization, malnutrition crisis.

  4. Rajasthan (Literacy: 69%, IMR: 38, Stunting: 39%)

    • Why? Gender discrimination, desert-area challenges.

  5. Jharkhand (Literacy: 67%, IMR: 32, Stunting: 38%)

    • Why? Left-wing extremism disrupts services.

4. Remedial Measures for India

1. Increase Public Spending

  • Raise education spending to 6% of GDP (as per Kothari Commission).

  • Boost healthcare spending to 2.5% of GDP (WHO recommendation).

2. Strengthen Last-Mile Delivery

  • Use Aadhaar to reduce leakage in PDS and mid-day meals.

  • Mobile health units for remote villages.

3. Focus on Women & Girls

  • Cash incentives for girls’ education (like Bihar’s Mukhyamantri Kanya Utthan Yojana).

  • Expand maternity benefits under PM Matru Vandana Yojana.

4. Improve Sanitation & Nutrition

  • Strict enforcement of Swachh Bharat to eliminate open defecation.

  • Fortified foods in ICDS to combat anemia.

5. Decentralize Governance

  • Empower panchayats to manage schools and health centers (Kerala model).

  • Performance-based funding for states (reward improvements in IMR, literacy).

Conclusion

India’s development story is one of progress but uneven gains. While Kerala and Tamil Nadu rival global leaders, Bihar and UP lag behind. China and Thailand’s success came from strong public systems, women’s empowerment, and efficient governance—lessons India must adopt.

By increasing funding, improving implementation, and focusing on equity, India can bridge these gaps and ensure healthier, better-educated future generations.

What do you think? Should India prioritize health or education first? 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tamil Nadu’s Economic and Social Journey (1950–2025): A Comparative Analysis with Future Horizons

Executive Summary Tamil Nadu has transformed from an agrarian economy in 1950 to India’s second-largest state economy by 2023–24, with a GSDP of ₹31 lakh crore and a per capita income (₹3,15,220) 1.71 times the national average. Its diversified economy—spanning automotive, textiles, electronics, IT, and sustainable agriculture—is underpinned by a 48.4% urbanization rate, 80.3% literacy, and a 6.5% poverty rate. Compared to Maharashtra, Gujarat, Karnataka, AP, and India, Tamil Nadu excels in social indicators (HDI: 0.708) and diversification, trailing Maharashtra in GSDP scale and Karnataka in IT dominance. Dravidian social reforms, the Green Revolution, post-1991 liberalization, and the 2021 Industrial Policy were pivotal. State budgets show opportunities in infrastructure and renewables but face constraints from welfare spending (40%) and debt (25% GSDP). Projected GSDP growth of 8–9% through 2025 hinges on electronics, IT, and green energy, leveraging strengths like a skilled workfor...
Post a Comment
Read more

India’s Integrated Air Defense and Surveillance Ecosystem

India’s Integrated Air Defense and Surveillance Ecosystem: An Analysis with Comparisons to Israel and China India’s air defense and surveillance ecosystem, centered on the Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS), integrates ground-based radars (e.g., Swordfish, Arudhra), Airborne Early Warning and Control (Netra AEW&C), AWACS (Phalcon), satellites (RISAT, GSAT), and emerging High-Altitude Platform Systems (HAPS) like ApusNeo. Managed by DRDO, BEL, and ISRO, it uses GaN-based radars, SATCOM, and software-defined radios for real-time threat detection and response. The IACCS fuses data via AFNET, supporting network-centric warfare. Compared to Israel’s compact, advanced C4I systems and China’s vast IADS with 30 AWACS, India’s six AWACS/AEW&C and indigenous focus lag in scale but excel in operational experience (e.g., Balakot 2019). Future plans include Netra Mk-1A/Mk-2, AWACS-India, and HAPS by 2030. Challenges include delays, limited fleet size, and foreign platform d...
Post a Comment
Read more

Financial and Welfare Impact of a 30% U.S. Defense Budget Cut on NATO Member States: Implications for the EU, UK, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain (2025–2030)

 Preamble This analysis aims to estimate the financial, economic, and social welfare impacts on NATO member states if the United States reduces its defense budget by 30% over the next five years (2025–2030) and expects other members to cover the resulting shortfalls in NATO’s common budget and future war-related expenditures. The focus is on the European Union (EU) as a whole and the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, assuming war spending patterns similar to those over the past 35 years (1989–2024), pro-rated for 2025–2030. The report quantifies the additional spending required, expresses it as a percentage of GDP, and evaluates the impact on Europe’s welfare economies, including potential shortfalls in social spending. It also identifies beneficiaries of the current NATO funding structure. By providing historical contributions, projected costs, and welfare implications, this report informs policymakers about the challenges of redistributing NATO’s financial resp...
Post a Comment
Read more