Issues of Inequality and Environment Sustainability in Chhattisgarh

Upendra Kumar Sahu*   Pankaj Kumar** Dr. Raksha Singh***

*School of Studies in Economics, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

**School of Studies in Economics, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

***Shri Sankracharaya College, Bhilai-Durg Chhattisgarh.

upendrakumarsahu987@gmail.com, pankajsahu125@gmail.com, rakshasingh20@rediffmail.com

Abstract:                  

This paper is a review of the recent advances in the Issues of Inequality and Environment Sustainability in Chhattisgarh during the current circumstances. Inequality and Environment Sustainability can have several dimensions. Economists are mostly concerned with the income and consumption dimensions of Inequalities. An Inequality includes in skill, health, wealth, education, opportunities, happiness and others. The direct and indirect effects of inequality in Environment Sustainability matters on earning and health, wealth, education, are discussed. This indicates that one should account for the interrelationship between the different dimensions in the measurement and analysis of inequalities. The paper discussed only about income, health and education indicators.  

1. ITRODUCTION:

The globalization and intensification of environmental degradations induced by the contemporary mode of development question the long-term viability of the globalization process. The accumulation of wealth is considered through the prism of its sustainability. The critics, in a more or less radical way, call into question the regulation mechanisms that govern the relations between economic systems and environment. The neo- classic authors pretend that the market remains the most efficient institution to integrate ecological constraints, on the double condition that these externalities are internalized and the technological progress is circulated. Heterodox economists dispute this optimist version of market failures, and wonder about the necessity to adopt another paradigm of economic development.

Nowadays the relationships between the human activities and their environment are approached through the concept of sustainable development (CMED, 1987). Its three pillars, economic, social and ecological, interact to lead the society on the path of a long-term viable growth. In order to determine the conditions of sustainability, most of the authors focus on the link-up between economic and environmental spheres. This paper aims at studying the consequences of the inclusion of the social relations’ influence. Behind the impact of the GDP per capita, isn’t it that the social and power inequalities play a prominent part regarding the evolution of the relations between environment and society?

Right in the heart of all paradigms of sustainable development, lies the question of long-term compatibility between economic growth and a reasonable use of the capacities of assimilation of our ecosystems and natural resources. In the standard approach, sustainability fosters a dependence link towards the per capita GDP growth. But as from the 1990’s, some empiric studies put forward the idea that economic growth and respect of ecological constraints are compatible in the long run. Known as the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), this analysis postulates that the impact of anthropogenic activities on natural environment obeys a differentiated dynamism according to the level of per capita income (Grosman and Krueger, 1994; Seden and Song, 1994; Shafik and Bandyopadhyay, 1992; World Bank, 1992). In a formal way, the relation between polluting emissions and the per capita GDP level takes the shape of an inverted-U curve.

2. INEQUATIES INDICES:      

Disparities indices can be derived from the Lorenz Curve construction also give us a rough measure of the amount of inequality in the income distribution. It’s called the Gini coefficient. The range of the variance is the two common statistical measure of desperation for a distribution in general. These are useful measurement in the context of income the range is defined as the absolute difference between the highest and the lowest income level discriminated by average income.

RGE   =     (   Xmax -  Xmin)µ

Anand (1997) discuss indices based on the Lorenz diagram and also several other indices. The Absolute Mean Difference index is among the indices based on the Lorenz diagram as an alternative definition to the Gini coefficient AGC is specified as:

AGC   =    1/2 (  AMDiff /µ )

Where, AMDiff =|x-y| f(x)f(y)dxdy is the absolute mean difference of two income distributions of x and y. AGC can also be defined as one-half of the relative mean difference:

AGC   =    1/2 (  AMDev /µ )

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:

The present study is based on the secondary data. The entire study is based on the data shown in table 1 and 2 in the period of 2001 to 2011continuasly. Through this study an analysis is made regarding the state income. The paper deals with the analytical study using compound growth rate, mean, standard division, regression, coefficient of variation (using one models) of the above factors.

Instability and Relative Growth Trend Analysis

CV = σ/μ × 100

Where σ = standard deviation and μ = mean. By fitting exponential function, compound growth rate is calculated and shown below. For this purpose, models are considered.

Model- I

Zt= a + bT

Where Zt = Income, education or health, a = parameter, b = regression

Coefficient and T = time element.

5. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

1. To know the inequality in Chhattisgarh.

2. The study of inequality relationship between Environment Sustainability in Chhattisgarh.

6. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND THEIR INEQULITIES:

(a) Relationship between inequality in income and education: Education impact is positive on earning. Differences in opportunities to invest in human capital, its level and quality together with poor redistribution policies may result in increased in inequality. Educational attachment and more equal distribution of education should in hence socio-economic growth and more equal income distribution. Castello and Domenech(2002) developed new measurement of human capital inequality for a panel of countries.

                    Gini^h  = 1/2H   |Xi-Xj| njni=n₀ +  n₁x₂(n₂+n₃)+n₃x₃(n₁n₂) 

n1x1+n2(x1+x2)n3(x1+x2+x3)

TABLE- 1. Income and education in Chhattisgarh state since 2001 to 2011                                 

Source: SRS based Arbitage life table1999-2003,1998-2002.

EDUCATION

y = education (dependent variable)

x = time (independent variable)

constant = 63.88

slope = 0.479

R² =  0.945

The table analyses regression graph with positive slop. The constant value is 0.479 and R square is 0.945 which indicate the 94.5% variation explaining on dependent variable by independent variable. 

(b) Relationship between income inequality and health (life expectancy)

Relationship between income inequality and health is created by Deton(2001). The empirical analysis is based on both rich and poor countries. The ill health is defined as the rate of life expectancy. In exploring the technical basic for a relationship Deaton anges discussed a range  of mechanism including education, economic growth, land-holding, politics public goods, relative deprivation.  Given the poor data quality underlying inequality, the conclusion is that there is no direct link from income inequality to ill health. However, in the design of redistributive policies the importance of income and other inequalities, and the social environment, should not be neglected. Income inequality is an indicator of the quality of social arrangements, of stress in rich countries, and of mortality in poor countries. Deaton and Lubotsky (2002) argue that the correlation between mortality rates and income inequality across the cities and states of the US is confounded by the effects of racial composition. For instance, conditional on the percentage of blacks neither city nor state mortality rates are correlated with income inequality. White mortality and incomes are lower in places where the fraction of blacks is higher.

TABLE- 2. Income and health in Chhattisgarh state since 2001 to 2011.                                  

Source: Annual Economic Review 2012-2013, Directorate of economic and statistics govt of Chhattisgarh, SRS based Arbitage life table1999-2003,1998-2002

Income

7. RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

Instability for Income, education, health, of socio-economic disparities of a Chhattisgarh in terms of C.V. presented in table 3. Coefficient of variation (C.V.) for income, education and health of socio-economic inequality for different period in Chhattisgarh. Result of modle –I

TABLE- 3                                      

Table 4. CGAR: Income

     Antilog of (-0.0157) -1×100

                                                        =.1037-100

                                                        =99.896

Table 5. CGAR: Education

     Antilog of (0.0276) -1×100

                                                        =.1065-100

                                                        =99.893

Table 6. CGAR: Health

     Antilog of (0.0176) -1×100

                                                        = 1042-100

                                                        = 99.895

Above the analysis of the income presented in table 6 it can be observed that instability in income is less compound of education and health for socio-economic in Chhattisgarh in different period  

 8. CONCLUSION:

It is clear that various dimensions of economic and sociology disparity – urban rural social class religion gender have agreed in the secret period when Chhattisgarh has been achieving accelerated economic growth and has been emerging as a national player this trend if not arrested and revered fast will have serious adverse implication for the Chhattisgarh economy society and polity as a present a majority of Chhattisgarh citizen have been by passed the  process of economic development either are able to contribute to the growth process or receive any tangible benefits

Disparity can have different dimension economics are mostly canceled with the income and consumption dimension of disparity among of the non income inequality dimension how can include include inequality in skill education opportunities happiness health life years mature and assets. How can we make the economic growth in Chhattisgarh inclusive the backward regions the rural areas the magnified social classes and the women indeed this is the principal theme being addressed in the 11^th five year plan with an appropriately titled approach paper ``towards  faster and more inclusive growth` plan document being finalized deals with strategic initiatives for inclusive development three areas are dealt in great details  child care empowerment thought education  and   health , wealth etc. Finally those who believe in tickle down theory argue that poverty is coming down and no one is worse off as a result of high growth then why worry about increasing disparities? But in a vibrant democracy even illiterate people are aware of the highly iniquitous shaving of the benefits of development they expressed their resentment against the Chhattisgarh shining in are countries

The effects on in quality in economic income factors an earnings can be summarized variously inequality in education explains a minor fraction of differences in cross count earnings inequality the impact diereses by the land of education and depend in the education and depend on the economic development and skill intensive rapture of production technologies it also negativity affects the invested rate and growth rate of income unlike in case of income inequality with in county health inequality is a domination sores of inequality.

There is much scope for further research on these issues. Among the potentially fruitful Avenues for future study are the following:

•        The measurement of power and power inequality,  including the identification of relevant variables, alternative methods for aggregating these variables into comprehensive measures, and tests of their robustness;

•        Investigation of household-level relationships between income and environmental of environmental policies, but also for estimation of the “aggregation effect” of income distribution on environmental quality;

•        Exploration of differences among environmental variables, in terms of public demand for (and opposition to) environmental protection and its marginal costs;

•        Extension of environmental injustice research to include exposure to hazards

•        (Rather than just the location of hazardous facilities) and the impacts on such exposure on health, economic well-being, and other quality-of-life variables;

•        Documentation of the links between power-related variables, specific environmental policies, and specific environmental outcomes;

•        Estimation of the net effect of inequality on the environmental quality experienced by those who are relatively well-off, to assess whether more egalitarian distributions of power and income might bring absolute gains in this dimension of their well-being even at this end of the distributional spectrum.

REFERENCES:

1.     Anderton, Douglas L., Andy B. Anderson, John Michael Oakes, Michael R. Fraser, Eleanor W. Weber, and Edward J. Calabrese (1994a) “Hazardous Waste Facilities: EnvironmentalEquity Issues in Metropolitan Areas,” Evaluation Review 18(2): 123-140.

2.     Almas heshmati “Inequality and their measurement” (2004) for schanrgsistist zur  zunkutti der arbit institute of study of  labour, IZA DP, NO.1219.

3.     Annual economic service (2012-13), diractorate of economic and statistics government of Chhattisgarh.

4.     Censes of India (2001), New Delhi: National ministry of home affairs, Govt. of india. http: //en.Wikipedia.org/ wik/india shinig assed on September 01/2016.

5.     Kakwami N.A wogstaff  and E. Van Benzeval (1998) reply to recorded Wilkinson, Social ,46,567-579.

6.     Kuznets, Simon (1963) “Quantitative Aspects of the Economic Growth of Nations,”Economic Development and Cultural Change 11(2/II): 1-80.

7.     Mallika, V., 2012, “Agrarian Crisis in India: It’s Impact on Production and Export,  an article/report in indiastat.com, socio-economic voices, 1-8.

8.     Metcalf, Gilbert E. (1999) “A Distributional Analysis of an Environmental Tax Shift,”National Tax Journal 52(4): 655-681.

9.     National human development report (2001), New Delhi: planning commission government of India,

10.  Report of the 12^th finance commission, (2004-05), New Delhi Ministry of finance government of india.

11.  SRS based aritage life table 1999-2003,1998-2002, 200-2006

12.  Subramanian swami (1997) measurement of inequality and poverty readers in economics oxford university press.

13.  UNDP human development report, (2004), cultural liberty in today’s diverse world New Delhi Oxford University.