The India success story is an urban phenomenon and hence a myth

India has made rapid strides since the economic reforms of 1991 which has resulted in the economy opening up to foreign investment and has created a burgeoning middle class of 300 million people which is expanding at a rapid rate. At the same time, there are certain aspects that haven’t changed at all from the post independence era and an estimated 600 million people still live on 2 dollars a day or less. This clearly shows that India is a land of contrasts and it is important to examine both sides of the coin to get a balanced view of the topic proposed above.

For

India's diverse economy encompasses traditional village farming, modern agriculture, handicrafts, a wide range of modern industries, and a multitude of services. Services are a major contributor to economic growth, accounting for more than half of India's output with less than one third of its labor force. About three-fifths of the work force is in agriculture but they make up less than a third of GDP and are characterized by low income levels, poor quality of life and a weak base of human development. Nearly one-third of the national income comes from villages, but there is a significant rural-urban divide.

The agricultural sector has been growing at less than half the pace of the other sectors. During the Seventh Plan, agriculture and allied sectors grew at a rate of 3.4 per cent, while the national economy grew at 6 per cent. In 1997-98, there was a negative growth of 2 per cent in the agricultural sector, although the national economy grew by 5 per cent.

Despite the advancements made, India remains one of the poorest countries in the world. Unemployment rate is 7.2% (2007 estimate). 85.7% of the population was living on less than $2.50 (PPP) a day as recently as in 2005, compared with 80.5% for Sub-Saharan Africa. Even though the Green Revolution brought an end to famines in India, half of Indian children are underweight - one of the highest rates in the world and nearly double the rate of Sub-Saharan Africa. One measure of the magnitude of poverty is the proportion of income spent on food — there is, as a rule, a direct correlation. According to the National Sample Survey results of 2001, 56 per cent of expenditure in rural areas and 44 per cent in urban areas was food related, which is quite high. In rupee terms, the all-India average monthly per capita consumer expenditure (MPCE) was Rs 495 in rural areas and Rs 914 in urban ones. The yearly rise in MPCE is also low in rural areas: Rs 9 from the previous year. That is a rise of just two per cent a year. The urban rise is seven per cent of Rs 60, a simple, if powerful, explanation for why the rural poor flock to urban India, even if the conditions of living are bad.

A fifth of rural households live precariously; while less than one per cent don't get enough to eat during some months of a year, another 19 per cent get enough to eat only during the busy months. When it's lean season, they join the "chronically hungry" category. The introduction of the policy of liberalization has affected non-farm employment in rural areas. In 1997-98, the annual increase in non-farm employment in rural areas was 4.06 per cent. In 1983-84 it was 3.28 per cent. During 1999-2000 it came down to 2.14 per cent. The consequence has been a very slow reduction in rural poverty. In 1993-94 it was 39.36 per cent, in 1999-2000 the figure came down marginally to 36.35 per cent. According to one estimate, the average income of an urban dweller is four times higher than that of a rural dweller.

Rural deprivation becomes crystal clear if we look at the data on rural India's contribution to GDP and what they areas get back. Rural contribution is 27 per cent but the return is 5 per cent. In 1999-2000 the per capita per month consumption expenditure in rural areas was Rs.486.08 while in the case of urban areas it was Rs.854.96, according to the Human Development Report 2002. Rural adult illiteracy is a matter of alarming concern. In 2001, the urban literacy rate was 80.06 per cent but the rural literacy rate was 59.21 per cent. Thus, the difference in rural - urban areas in terms of percentage points is 20.85. Data released by the Planning Commission shows that among illiterate people aged 60 years and above, 78.2 per cent live in rural areas. In urban areas the figure is 48.2 per cent. Of the illiterate people who are 15 years and above but not beyond 60 years, rural areas have 55.8 per cent and the urban areas 25.1 per cent.

The Indian state has the primary responsibility to supply safe drinking water to all people in the country irrespective of their place of habitat. But the situation is far from desirable. The National Sample Survey (NSS) data (1998, 5th round) shows that while 70.1 per cent of urban dwellers have access to piped water; in the case of the rural people it is as low as 18.7 per cent. Public health facilities are so inadequate in rural areas that the death rate per 1,000 is 9.6 per cent while in urban areas it is 6 per cent. In rural areas the infant mortality rate is 77 per 1,000 but in urban areas it is as low as 45. The same scenario emerges if we look at the data on households with access to toilets tabulated in the National Human Development Report, 2002, prepared by the Planning Commission. In 1991, such facilities were enjoyed by only 9.48 per cent of rural households; in the case of urban households it was 63.85 per cent. In India, according to the data tabulated in HDR 2002, only 30.54 per cent of rural households had electricity; in the case of urban areas it was higher: 75.78 per cent. The value for rural areas is 0.340, in the case of urban areas it is as high as 0.511.

Thus given the facts stated above, it would perhaps not be too divorced from the truth to state that the India success story is largely restricted to the urban areas and there is a need for more inclusive growth in the country.

Against

However, having brought notice to the above facts, it would also be fair to assess the developments that have taken place in the rural context. As stated at the outset, the Indian growth story began in 1991, when current Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (who was Finance Minister then) came up with a path-breaking budget and policies that sowed the seeds of growth that all of us are witnessing today. GDP at market prices has increased from US$ 20 billion in 1950-51 to US$ 912 billion in 2006-07 and is expected to cross a trillion dollars in the current year. In terms of purchasing power parity (PPP), India’s GDP at US$ 4 trillion in 2006-07 accounted for 6.3 per cent of global GDP. Average annual economic growth, which had been constant and tardy at 3.5 per cent during the first thirty years of Independence, increased to 5.7 per cent during the 1990s and, since 2003-04, the average rate has increased further to 8.6 per cent. 2006-07, in particular, was a splendid year with the GDP growing at 9.4 per cent.

This growth has not been jobless growth. During 1999-2000 to 2004-05, India added to its workforce about 12 million people each year. During this period, the rate of growth of employment was 2.9 per cent per year. India, today, is among the fastest growing economies of the world next only to China. The proportion of people living below the poverty line in India has declined from 51.3 per cent in 1977-78 to about 22 per cent in 2004-05. The Indian Govt has achieved an enrollment ratio of 95 per cent in primary education. Of the children in school, 73 per cent are now reaching Grade V.

A massive road building program is boosting connectivity and lowering transaction costs. The positive impact of flexible markets is already apparent in growing s to connect farmers directly with retail consumers. Deregulation, the building of rural roads and the growth of sophisticated commodity markets is already transforming Indian agriculture. The Pradhan Mantri Grameen Sadak Yojana was launched in December 2000 as a project aimed at improving rural roads and facilitating better connectivity for 160000 unconnected rural habitations with populations of 500 persons or more by the end of the Tenth period at an estimated cost of US$13.33 billion. The program aims at upgrading 500,000 km of rural roads.

Private firms are increasingly supplying more inputs and buying more output directly from the farmer, cutting out the middlemen. The ITC E-choupal initiative is a case in point. Financial institutions are becoming far more active in funding agriculture especially under new arrangements such as contract farming and futures markets. The recently started re-organization of farm production with better technology, more specialization, and greater quality control and facilitates the growth of agro-industry and better supply chains. Some of the schemes adopted by the current govt include Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (education for all) as well as allocating funds for irrigation projects. It has increased spending on rural electrification and health and has also provided subsidies worth tens of thousands of crores for fertilizers, electricity and rural credit. In 2004, the UPA government launched Bharat Nirman, an ambitious infrastructure program for rural areas. It aims to provide connectivity by having a pucca road, electricity, telecom and drinking water in every village of over 1,000 people.

One can therefore hope that with the effective implementation of all these projects and given a reasonable time frame, there will definitely be an impact on rural prosperity which will make it impossible for one to view urban success in isolation.

The Copenhagen Conundrum

The international community in a bid to control the problem of GHG emissions, particularly that of carbon dioxide, hammered out the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, whereby 37 developed nations (called Annexe-I countries) agreed to roll back their GHG emissions by 5.2 percent (on an average) of their 1990 concerned levels. The US however did not ratify the protocol, though it announced some voluntary emission cuts.

Background and Objectives of the Summit
The Kyoto Protocol is to expire in 2012 and the 15th United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009, at Copenhagen, Denmark (December 7th to 18th) (COP 15) was held to chalk out the next phase of climate control actions, regarding GHG emissions, at a global level. Expectations were high with 192 countries participating in the international forum to decide the future of the Earth and that of mankind.
The United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Bali in 2007 agreed on negotiations for a stringent international climate change pact, to be finalized at the December 2009 Copenhagen meet.
The key issues up for consideration at the COP 15 meet included the following:

•Mitigation (reduction of GHG emissions)
•Adaptation ( coping with the effects of climate change)
•Finance and Technology ( provision of assistance to the developing nations, in their efforts at emission containment)

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
A UNFCC report dated 21st October 2009, revealed that the rise in GHG emissions from the industrialized nations has continued unabated from 2000 to 2007, the overall growth figure being 3% in the concerned period for the 40 industrialized nations with reporting obligations to the Convention. From 2006 to 2007 the said increase was 1 percent.
The consistently upward trend of GHG emissions from developed nations, despite a decline in economic activities (as an after-effect of the recent global recession) is a serious cause for concern, according to UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Yvo de Boer. This highlighted the need for a global political consensus for reaching a comprehensive, effective and fair climate change deal at COP 15. UNFCCC data also supports the gradual build up of the global carbon trade market in 2008, as a means of addressing the emission issue, as suggested in the Kyoto Protocol.

Comparative Pollution Figures
China is the world's biggest GHG emitter (20.7 percent of global emissions) followed by the US (accounting for 15.5 percent of global emissions). Global emission percentages for the African Union, European Union, India, Japan, Gulf countries and island nations are 8.1percent, 11.8 percent, 5 percent, 3.3 percent, 2.3 percent and 0.6 percent respectively. Per-capita emission figures are considerably lower for countries like India and China as compared to that of the developed nations.

COP 15 discussions - A Round-up
Much drama unfolded in the two weeks of talks aimed at forging a new global climate treaty at Copenhagen, the high point being the face-off between the post industrialized developed economies (like Europe and the US) and the emerging, industrializing nations like China, India and Brazil.
The industrialized countries demanded all major developing nations to open up their domestic climate actions for international scrutiny or MRV (Monitoring, Review and Verification).
This proposal was met with strong resentment from the emerging economies, who stated that their internal climate action plans were all voluntary disclosures and that they were not bound by any international treaty. India specifically opined that the developed nations were first themselves responsible for the present environmental mess and deeper emission cuts were not feasible for India, as it needed faster and cheaper growth, for tackling issues like poverty and underdevelopment. However, it also made a declaration of voluntary reduction of 20-25 percent of its emission intensity, by 2020. Similar measures were also announced by Brazil and China. China echoed India's sentiments in speaking for the G-77 nations.
However, a difference of opinion arose in the group of 120 developing nations represented by the G-77 and China; one of its members, Tuvalu, a small Pacific island country, proposed a new international treaty on the lines of the Kyoto Protocol, ostensibly to make the US accountable via a global treaty. It also called for "verifiable, nationally appropriate mitigation" measures from major developing nations. The proposal was summarily rejected by G-77 and China. African nations voiced their concern about sinister efforts at the summit at abandoning the Kyoto Protocol (which put legally bound GHG emission limits on industrialized nations sparing the developing economies).
The developing nations demanded deeper emission cuts, ranging from 25 percent to 45 percent by 2020, from the wealthier countries, along with the availability of technology and resources from them to help contain the effects of climate change. The different parties steadfastly held on to their demands and talks almost hit a dead-end.
It should be noted that the Annexe-1 countries (the developed nations) have done precious little towards the realization of their obligatory 5 percent emission reduction by 2012 (under the Kyoto Protocol) and the US never ratified the Kyoto Protocol on growth considerations, but are part of the UNFCCC process.
Buckling under US diplomatic pressure, India finally agreed to sit for discussions regarding international scrutiny of its domestic GHG emission curbing actions at COP15. As if on cue, the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, announced America's commitment to work towards raising $100 billion annually for creation of a fund by 2020, for assisting the developing nations engaged in coping with climate changes.
Money pledged to the developing nations towards emission control was another key element of the global climate talks. The European Union pledged around $3.5 billion annually, for a period of 3 years and the US, around $1.2 billion in 2009. The US also announced multinational efforts worth $350 million for transferring clean technology to the developing nations.
However, the amount pledged is way below the requirement, as estimated by global agencies like the World Bank and the International Energy Agency. Differences in opinion also exist about the mode of grant financing; while donors want most of the sum to come from carbon trade levies, recipients want it to come from public money.

The Copenhagen Accord
The newly minted Copenhagen Accord is a broad, legally nonbinding, accord put together by China, India, South Africa, Brazil and the US. The Accord was finally accepted by the 'Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change' on 19th December 2009, as reported by Reuters. UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon announced that the accord would come into 'immediate operational effect'. He also opined that, the Copenhagen accord ought to transform itself into a legally binding treaty in 2010. The accord is still being hotly debated upon by nations the world over, and it is still not clear as to how many nations would finally become signatories to the deal.
The Copenhagen accord supports deep emission cuts aimed at limiting the rise in global temperatures below 2 degrees Celsius, as compared to the pre-industrial levels. [In June 2009, most developing nations including the G8 group agreed on containing the average global temperature rise within 2°C (3.6F), as compared to the pre-industrial level. However, some island nations have lobbied for a 1.5°C temperature bar and around 85 percent emission cuts by 2050].
No definite percentage of emission reduction has been declared on behalf of the European nations in the accord and the US still remains outside the purview of the Kyoto Protocol. The accord proposes a legally binding treaty on climate change by 2010. Mitigation plans (emission cuts for the developed nations and voluntary disclosures for developing nations) for both the developed and the developing nations are not legally binding under the current accord.
The accord pledges flow of adequate, sustainable and predictable financial aid and technology from the developed nations towards the developing countries to cater to their climate adaptation needs (in particular the LDCs, small island nations and the African countries). Developed nations have jointly agreed towards raising $100 billion annually, by 2020, for the developing countries. They are also to provide around US $ 30 billion in 2010-2012 to developing countries, towards their adaptation and mitigation needs, on the GHG emissions issue.
Funding will reportedly come from various sources, including private, public, multilateral and bilateral financing. A large chunk of funds are set to flow from the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund. The accord also announces the incorporation of a technology mechanism for accelerating the process of technology development and transfer to the developing nations.
Emerging economies have been asked to continuously monitor their climate mitigation efforts and report the same to the UN every 2 years. Some international checks have also been proposed, with due allowance for respecting the national sovereignty of nations. No deadlines have been given in this matter yet, reflecting China's hard-line stance on the issue.
Developed nations have also agreed to provide financial assistance for controlling deforestation in developing countries. The accord also speaks of the usage of the carbon markets as a cost effective climate mitigation measure, without going into any detailed analysis.

Political Observations
US president, Barack Obama has termed the agreement 'meaningful' and added that efforts would be on towards reaching a significant emission control regime in the near future. British prime minister, Gordon Brown has stressed on the need to quickly follow up the accord with a legally binding agreement on emission control. The accord has come under criticism from EU Commission President, Jose Manuel Barroso for its nonbinding nature. China expressed happiness with the deal, while Brazil marked it a disappointment, if not a total failure and called for the need to resolve unsettled issues like specific emission cuts at the earliest. Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, heading the G-77 termed it as a suicide pact for the African nations. Similar sentiments were echoed by island nation Tuvalu and Maldives, who wanted the temperature bar to be 1.5 degrees, fearing imminent danger from rising sea levels if immediate stringent emission curbs were not laid. COP15 President, the Danish Prime Minister, Lars Løkke Rasmussen has expressed satisfaction at the developments but Yvo de Boer, Head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change secretariat was however not upbeat about the outcome.

An Overview
The Copenhagen accord can at best be termed as an operating framework for enabling future climate negotiations. The emergence of a weak climate declaration was also somewhat expected as per observations of political leaders attending the APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit in Singapore in November 2009. US President Barack Obama observed, in the context of the Copenhagen talks that, more confidence building measures are required among the LDCs, developed and emerging nations before reaching a legally binding international treaty on climate change.
Considering the serious dimensions that our climate problems have reached, expectations were high on reaching a more meaningful deal; but two weeks of frantic discussions failed to resolve the conflict of interests among the LDCs, developed and developing nations and a watered down agreement was all that could be salvaged for keeping alive the line of hope for the future of our planet.

Insurance Management

Insurance, as we all know, means being covered or protected against any hazards of life. It provides a safety net to both individuals and enterprises. The insurance industry is fast developing and many insurance companies are entering both life and non-life segments. With a boom in the insurance industry, there has been an increasing need for skilled professionals in the sector. A few years ago there were no professional courses dedicated to insurance, but now the scenario has changed and insurance companies along with the academic institutes have started offering specialized courses at the post-graduation level. The current scenario of the insurance sector is a very rosy one. Hardly 22 percent of the insurable population enjoys the protected umbrella of insurance, and rural market still remains largely untapped. As against only one life insurer and four general insurance companies in 2000, there are, at present, forty plus life and general insurance companies vying for a piece of the insurance cake. This is proof positive of the fact that there is vast un-chartered and under-covered territory and there is an unlimited scope for growth in this field in the country.

Indian Scenario
According to Associated Chambers of Commerce (ASSOCHAM) a growth of over 200 per cent is likely to be seen in Indian insurance business by 2010. At present insurance sector is booming and experts have projected a CAGR not less than 25 percent for the sector. Earlier an MBA in insurance was unheard of, but now with the entry of private players in the insurance sector and expansion of its operations, insurance has acquired the entity of global business. Professionals with eminent skills in managing the operations of insurance sector are highly in demand

Hospitality and Tourism

The Hospitality industry is a sunrise industry with a growth-rate of 11 percent. According to the Tourism Satellite Accounting (TSA) report, India is one of the most preferred tourist destinations for travelers across the globe. Growing at an average of 9.4 per cent over the next ten years, the above figure is expected to go up to almost USD 275.5 billion by 2018. Further, the industry is expected to contribute 6.1 per cent to India's GDP and provide almost 40 million jobs by 2018.
Hospitality is largely a people-oriented industry; the functioning revolves around a 24/7 cycle, requiring committed professionals. When recession hit the world last year, the tremors were felt in the hospitality sector too. However, the sector is showing signs of revival in India especially in the wake of the impending Commonwealth games. As the economy turns around and disposable income increases, one is likely to see a perceptible positive change in the hospitality sector. This is further likely to generate a large requirement of hospitality professionals in India.

Infrastructure: INDIA 2010

Anyone even remotely acquainted with the Indian economy would speak volumes about its almost phenomenal transition to a high growth path since the launch of the liberalization process in the early 1990s. But as the economy successively graduated from one growth track to a higher one, there came with it a growing realization that without the expansion of infrastructural facilities, the risks of overheating and inflation in the economy were just too high.

Across levels of policymaking and industry, a commonly acknowledged fact was that the existing infrastructure in the country was simply not adequate to achieve or sustain the target growth rates. That acknowledgement came through officially from the government when in the preface to the Eleventh Five Year Plan, it stated: "Poor quality of infrastructure seriously limits India's growth potential in the medium term and the Eleventh Plan outlines a comprehensive strategy for development of both rural and urban infrastructure. The total investment in these areas was around 5 percent of GDP in 2006-07 and the Plan aims at increasing this to about 9 percent of GDP by the terminal annum 2011-12."

Energy and Environment

Energy lies at the core of all economic activity and controls a country's rate of growth and development; the type and volume of our energy usage determines our environment. India is poised to become the fastest growing global economy in 2010, as per World Bank estimates, which project an 8 percent growth-rate for the country, ahead of China's projected 7.7 percent for the same period. However, India needs to strike a balance between its twin objectives of inclusive growth and sustainable development. A sustainable developmental path (with augmented focus on efficient and clean technologies) would entail an estimated additional investment of around 1.8 percent to 2.3 percent of the national GDP in 2010-2030.

Importance to the Indian Scenario

A McKinsey report released in August 2009 provides a projection of the Indian economy by 2030: real per capita GDP will climb to US$2700 (five times the 2005 level), cities will host around half a billion people, demand for power will rise to 3870 TWh (from 700 TWh in 2005), and automobiles will number around 380 million (an estimated 7 percent growth compared to 2005). India's gross energy demand will shoot up to 1.8 btoe per year (from 0.5 btoe in 2005) [making it the third biggest global energy consumer, after the US and China]. Hike in energy consumption and matching fossil fuel supply would push-up India's GHG emissions between 5.0 to 6.5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, on an estimated GDP growth of 6 percent to 9 percent. The power sector is slated to become the biggest emitter, accounting for an estimated 2.9 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, by 2030.
India's market in low carbon and environmental goods and services is worth about US$270.98 billion (which translates to a 6 percent share of the global market, valued at US$4.32 trillion). Sustainable energy investment in India climbed to US$ 3.7 billion in 2008, a 12 percent hike compared to 2007 figures. India's National Action Plan on Climate Change (announced in June, 2008) focuses on promotion of renewable energy, energy efficiency via market based mechanisms (like energy savings certifications), recycling, overhauling of public transport, energy conservation, and creation and maintenance of forests, as effective 'carbon sinks'.
Government of India's Energy Conservation Act 2001, highlights the need for energy conservation and audit and identifies 14 energy intensive industries such as Aluminium, Fertilizers, Iron and Steel, Cement, Pulp and paper, Chlor Akali, Sugar, Textile, Chemicals, Railways, Port Trust, Transport Sector, Petrochemicals, Gas and Naphtha Crackers, Petroleum Refineries, Thermal and Hydel power stations, Electricity transmission and distribution companies and Commercial establishments.
Budgetary allocation under 'Accelerated Power Development and Reform Programme' has risen by 160 percent to Rs 2080 crore in 2009-10, from that in 2008-09.

SAVE TIGER

Tigers are on the threshold of extinction. According to WWF, Tigers are amongst the ten most endangered species in the world. Over the last century more than 95% of the Tiger population has been wiped out & three sub-species are already extinct. Less than 3500 tigers remain in the wild today with around 50% in India & their numbers are declining fast.

Initial results from the Wildlife Institute of India Tiger census (released on 24 May 2007) are warning that India has far fewer tigers living than had been previously thought.

Indian Tiger Welfare Society, moved by the plight of the members of "Cat Family" like tigers due to shrinking habitat and large scale poaching, Indian Tiger Welfare was founded to spread awareness and work towards building safe haven for tigers that include Royal Bengal tiger, and Indian white tiger. The organisation shares the global conerns of protecting these endangered species and has joined hands with many such organisations who share the same conerns.The organisation shares the global conerns of protecting these endangered species and has joined hands with many such organisations who share the same conerns.

Not only is tiger a beautiful animal but it is also the indicator of the forest's health. Saving the tiger means we save the forest since tiger cannot live in places where trees have vanished and in turn secure food and water for all.

If we make sure tigers live, we have to make sure that deer, antelope and all other animals that the tiger eats (its prey base) live. To make sure that these herbivores live, we must make sure that all the trees, grass and other plants that these prey animals need for food are protected. In this way, the whole forest gets saved! Saving the tiger means saving its entire forest kingdom with all the other animals in it.

Also forests catch and help store rainwater and protect soils. In this way we protect our rivers and recharge groundwater sources. Areas with less trees lead to floods, killing people and destroying homes. It takes away the precious soil, leaving behind a wasteland. The soil jams up our lakes and dams, reducing their ability to store water. By destroying the tiger's home, we not only harm tigers, but also ourselves.

The tiger thus becomes the symbol for the protection of all species on our earth since it is at the top of the foodchain. This is why we sometimes call the tiger, an apex predator, an indicator of our ecosystem's health.