Reaffirming that age has never been an obstacle for Indian politicians, a recent report lists India as the country with the oldest head of government as well as the oldest ministerial cabinet among 15 of the largest economies in the world. At 78, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is one of the only two septuagenarians on the list. The average age of the Indian cabinet 64.4 years is almost two-and-a-half times the country's median age at 25.9. This is far greater than most of the developed economies where the difference is only a decade or so. Even the Chinese leadership is more youthful with an average cabinet age of 61.2 years.
We might have one of the youngest populations in the world, but the difference in age between our leaders and the populace is palpable. There is thus an increasing disconnect between the leadership and the people. Apart from the age gulf dynastic politics too is a massive hurdle to youth finding expression. The present lot of young leaders has to live in the shadow of political patriarchs until the latter make way, which in the Indian context could take an extraordinarily long time. A gerontocracy is fundamentally conservative and risk-averse, blocking reform in any direction. India's yawning age gulf goes a long way towards explaining the quality of the leadership we get. Reservation for women is now a hot-button political issue. Perhaps we also need to think in terms of reservation for youth, leaving out the creamy layer of those who come with dynastic connections. Institutionalisation of inner-party democracy would help, too.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Reforming India's Universities
KANTI BAJPAI, Aug 21
If India is to build a stable liberal democracy, if we are to empower the vast mass of the Indian public, if we want to give ourselves a more equitable and fair society, and if we want sustainable economic growth, then our university system desperately needs to be reformed. The UPA government has understood this. Its plan to massively expand the university system is recognition that the idea of a liberal, empowering, just and sustainable India depends on a vibrant, expanding higher education system.
Critics have argued that quantity will come at the cost of quality. This is correct, but as Kapil Sibal, the minister for human resources development, has recognised, there is simply no alternative. Over the longer term, quality should improve. One way of dealing with the fall in standards is to bring in foreign talent. India's university system is depressingly Indian. You can walk the corridors of academe and not see a single foreign face amongst the faculty. Our university system does not embody universality. Like Indian industry in the 1960s and 1970s, it has shut out foreigners and has suffered as a result.
India's universities need to be made more 'universal' if they are to flourish. The latest ranking of world universities shows that India has a long way to go in higher education. Its once proud university system, the best in Asia after the Second World War, has fallen on very bad times. It is not that Indian university education has languished altogether. The IITs (even though they have a lot to answer for), IIMs and a host of other universities such as Delhi and JNU have brought high quality higher education to India. Nevertheless, relative to the rest of the world, India has fallen behind. It has also fallen behind in terms of India's demographics. Our much-vaunted 'demographic dividend' and 'youth bulge' will turn into a social and political nightmare if we do not expand and improve university education.
Bringing in foreign talent will help our university system. If we look around the world, we will see that no university system of any repute is insular, certainly not as insular as India's. Even China, with its authoritarian political system and its relative lack of English competence, has thousands of foreign faculty.
Historically, there is no major university system that has been self-sufficient. This is particularly true of the American university system which drew and continues to recruit massively from Europe and other continents. A university must be as universal as possible in terms of recruiting talent. Recruitment in India must be opened up not just to NRIs. It must be opened up to everyone Asians, Africans, Arabs, Europeans, Latin and North Americans that has the English language competence to teach in India.
The presence of foreign faculty will not only help bridge the gap in quality teachers. It will also have an impact on Indian colleagues. Good quality teachers from abroad will have a powerful demonstration effect. Indian universities, like Indian schools, suffer from teacher absenteeism, from lack of professionalism in terms of classroom transactions, from a lackadaisical approach to supervision and from abysmal research. Foreign colleagues, just in the normal course of their functioning, will both embarrass and inspire Indian counterparts.
More than any amount of exhortation from the HRD ministry or vice-chancellors or articles in newspapers, it is this that will energise the Indian faculty. Of course, hiring foreigners will cost us money. It will also require adjustment in our horrible visa and residency rules. We could save money by hiring foreigners on a part-time basis, at least in the beginning; see the experience of the Indian School of Business. And surely it is not beyond our home ministry, mad as it is, to amend our approach to visas and residency. India's national interest requires that we find the money and construct an entry system for foreign teachers. Above all, it requires that we change our attitude to the presence of foreign faculty in our universities.
If India is to build a stable liberal democracy, if we are to empower the vast mass of the Indian public, if we want to give ourselves a more equitable and fair society, and if we want sustainable economic growth, then our university system desperately needs to be reformed. The UPA government has understood this. Its plan to massively expand the university system is recognition that the idea of a liberal, empowering, just and sustainable India depends on a vibrant, expanding higher education system.
Critics have argued that quantity will come at the cost of quality. This is correct, but as Kapil Sibal, the minister for human resources development, has recognised, there is simply no alternative. Over the longer term, quality should improve. One way of dealing with the fall in standards is to bring in foreign talent. India's university system is depressingly Indian. You can walk the corridors of academe and not see a single foreign face amongst the faculty. Our university system does not embody universality. Like Indian industry in the 1960s and 1970s, it has shut out foreigners and has suffered as a result.
India's universities need to be made more 'universal' if they are to flourish. The latest ranking of world universities shows that India has a long way to go in higher education. Its once proud university system, the best in Asia after the Second World War, has fallen on very bad times. It is not that Indian university education has languished altogether. The IITs (even though they have a lot to answer for), IIMs and a host of other universities such as Delhi and JNU have brought high quality higher education to India. Nevertheless, relative to the rest of the world, India has fallen behind. It has also fallen behind in terms of India's demographics. Our much-vaunted 'demographic dividend' and 'youth bulge' will turn into a social and political nightmare if we do not expand and improve university education.
Bringing in foreign talent will help our university system. If we look around the world, we will see that no university system of any repute is insular, certainly not as insular as India's. Even China, with its authoritarian political system and its relative lack of English competence, has thousands of foreign faculty.
Historically, there is no major university system that has been self-sufficient. This is particularly true of the American university system which drew and continues to recruit massively from Europe and other continents. A university must be as universal as possible in terms of recruiting talent. Recruitment in India must be opened up not just to NRIs. It must be opened up to everyone Asians, Africans, Arabs, Europeans, Latin and North Americans that has the English language competence to teach in India.
The presence of foreign faculty will not only help bridge the gap in quality teachers. It will also have an impact on Indian colleagues. Good quality teachers from abroad will have a powerful demonstration effect. Indian universities, like Indian schools, suffer from teacher absenteeism, from lack of professionalism in terms of classroom transactions, from a lackadaisical approach to supervision and from abysmal research. Foreign colleagues, just in the normal course of their functioning, will both embarrass and inspire Indian counterparts.
More than any amount of exhortation from the HRD ministry or vice-chancellors or articles in newspapers, it is this that will energise the Indian faculty. Of course, hiring foreigners will cost us money. It will also require adjustment in our horrible visa and residency rules. We could save money by hiring foreigners on a part-time basis, at least in the beginning; see the experience of the Indian School of Business. And surely it is not beyond our home ministry, mad as it is, to amend our approach to visas and residency. India's national interest requires that we find the money and construct an entry system for foreign teachers. Above all, it requires that we change our attitude to the presence of foreign faculty in our universities.
India needs cadre of skilled youth: Kalam
Staff Reporter
— FILE Photo: PTI
Former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Bangalore: “No Indian youth should be without either a world class higher education or without world class skill sets,” former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam said here on Sunday.
Interacting with students and faculty at the Oxford Educational Institutions, he said that India needs a large number of talented youth with higher education “for the task of knowledge acquisition, knowledge imparting, knowledge creation and knowledge sharing”.
A large segment of India's population — 540 million people — is under the age of 25, he added.
India's university education system contributes three million graduates and post-graduates every year and the country's schools educate seven million a year.
“Educational systems should create two cadres of personnel — a global cadre of skilled youth… and another cadre of youth with higher education,” he said.
These cadres will be needed “not only for powering the manufacturing and services sectors of India but also… to [fulfil] the human resource requirements of various countries in specialised areas in science, technology, humanities and management,” said Prof. Kalam.
“The university system will have to work towards increasing the output of the higher education system from the existing 11 per cent to 15 per cent by 2015, 20 per cent by 2020 and 30 per cent by 2030,” he said.
In his inimitable style, Prof. Kalam charmed his young audience with his inspirational messages, some that he exhorted the students to repeat after him.
“Defeat the problem and succeed” was the central theme of his address, which he illustrated with examples from history and contemporary personalities.
It was his creative streak that helped Mario Capecchi overcome acute adversity and win the Nobel Prize, he said. Likewise, initial failure did not deter the genius A.K. Ramanujan, he added.
The former President acknowledged the work of H. Sudarshan, founder of Vivekananda Girijana Kalyan Kendra, at BR Hills.
“In the present circumstances and environment, it was inspiring to see how a MBBS doctor has put all his dreams in mainstreaming the tribal citizens of Karnataka for the last 25 years,” he said.
Potential
Addressing students of the Presidency Group of Institutions at an interactive session at the Koramangala Indoor Stadium, Prof. Kalam said that India has all the resources to become a developed nation by 2020 but lack of confidence among its youth was increasingly becoming a hindrance to make this dream a reality.
He said that India has made progress in various sectors, including agriculture and manufacturing, and it is leading the information technology revolution.
“We have everything to become a developed nation. However, the confidence level of our youth is a worry,” he said.
For students, it was a special class by “Kalam Sir” and they welcomed him with a huge applause, and some of them presented flowers too.
They were eagerly waiting to hear his speech and “Kalam Sir” did not disappoint them.
http://hindu.com/2010/08/30/stories/2010083060010400.htm
He taught them how to have “wings to fly” and urged them to “dream big”.
Former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam
Interacting with students and faculty at the Oxford Educational Institutions, he said that India needs a large number of talented youth with higher education “for the task of knowledge acquisition, knowledge imparting, knowledge creation and knowledge sharing”.
A large segment of India's population — 540 million people — is under the age of 25, he added.
India's university education system contributes three million graduates and post-graduates every year and the country's schools educate seven million a year.
“Educational systems should create two cadres of personnel — a global cadre of skilled youth… and another cadre of youth with higher education,” he said.
These cadres will be needed “not only for powering the manufacturing and services sectors of India but also… to [fulfil] the human resource requirements of various countries in specialised areas in science, technology, humanities and management,” said Prof. Kalam.
“The university system will have to work towards increasing the output of the higher education system from the existing 11 per cent to 15 per cent by 2015, 20 per cent by 2020 and 30 per cent by 2030,” he said.
In his inimitable style, Prof. Kalam charmed his young audience with his inspirational messages, some that he exhorted the students to repeat after him.
“Defeat the problem and succeed” was the central theme of his address, which he illustrated with examples from history and contemporary personalities.
It was his creative streak that helped Mario Capecchi overcome acute adversity and win the Nobel Prize, he said. Likewise, initial failure did not deter the genius A.K. Ramanujan, he added.
The former President acknowledged the work of H. Sudarshan, founder of Vivekananda Girijana Kalyan Kendra, at BR Hills.
“In the present circumstances and environment, it was inspiring to see how a MBBS doctor has put all his dreams in mainstreaming the tribal citizens of Karnataka for the last 25 years,” he said.
Potential
Addressing students of the Presidency Group of Institutions at an interactive session at the Koramangala Indoor Stadium, Prof. Kalam said that India has all the resources to become a developed nation by 2020 but lack of confidence among its youth was increasingly becoming a hindrance to make this dream a reality.
He said that India has made progress in various sectors, including agriculture and manufacturing, and it is leading the information technology revolution.
“We have everything to become a developed nation. However, the confidence level of our youth is a worry,” he said.
For students, it was a special class by “Kalam Sir” and they welcomed him with a huge applause, and some of them presented flowers too.
They were eagerly waiting to hear his speech and “Kalam Sir” did not disappoint them.
http://hindu.com/2010/08/30/stories/2010083060010400.htm
He taught them how to have “wings to fly” and urged them to “dream big”.
The burden of youth
SHAILAJA CHANDRA
Photo: Rajeev Bhatt
They deserve better: Better education, better opportunities...
Raise the topic of population and expect the following reactions: India will have the last laugh because its population is youthful and would continue to be so for decades more. Or, there is the Nandan Nilekeni idea which is fast becoming popular with optimistic urbanites — that a second hump of opportunity might miraculously emerge from the laggard Hindi belt States.
This oversimplification can cost us dearly. The demographic dividend argument is used in the West to signify the proportion of working people compared to retirees. In India, the so called dividend is actually represented by a disproportionately high number of young people who for the most part would be incapable of staying rooted to the school system and thereby end up uneducated and unemployable. In short, a burden on society.
Among them, girls will continue to have early pregnancies and their underweight infants will have poor chances of survival. For those that live, the cycle of malnutrition, stunting and wasting will be perpetrated and inequities will grow. Across the country, the regional and intra-State disparity would widen and resources for health and education would get sucked up or scattered before they can get to those in the greatest need. This is a recipe for disaster.
A development issue Governments need to recognise that population is not merely a health issue but an overarching development issue. Concrete measures are urgently needed to enforce the prevention of Child Marriage 2006 Act and to make marriage registration compulsory. Incentives are needed to push up the woman’s age at first birth and to make birth spacing attractive. Instead of honing in on a broad category called Below Poverty Line (BPL) it would make sense to target the lowest wealth quintile where fertility rates are disturbingly high.
Alok Ranjan Chaurasia and S. Gulati in “India the State of Population 2007” have divided the country into three groups. In the first group there are the Hindi belt States and some north-eastern states like Manipur and Meghalaya. Together they will account for more than half the population growth in the country by 2026. In these States, lowering fertility will be very difficult as the majority of couples use no contraception. Among the poorest families in these States, the “wanted fertility” factor, when parents want larger families as insurance against old age and to provide additional hands for work, is as high as 40 per cent of the total fertility. A “techno-medical model” of family planning as Chaurasia and Gulati call it, with a focus on female sterilisation will quite simply not work, because many couples actually want more children.
In the rest of the population of these States, including poorer families who do not want more children, a huge unmet demand for contraception exists. By present indications, the goal of two children per woman set for the country by 2010 will not even be achieved in the next two decades by these States. The New York Times mocked India’s “paradox of a proud democracy”, describing the persistence of child hunger and galloping malnutrition levels as worse than sub-Saharan African countries. Given this scenario, nothing can succeed unless the numbers become manageable. And waiting for trickle-down to happen, much less miracles to emerge from the sheer weight of a youthful population is being completely unrealistic.
In the second group, Gulati et al include States like Maharashtra, West Bengal, Gujarat, Haryana and Orissa, which have achieved or are about to achieve the two child goal. But even today these states measure the success of the family planning programme by sterilisation of women, usually undertaken after the demographic damage has been done. A stricter enforcement of the legal age of marriage and much greater stress on spacing methods, in the initial childbearing years, would be infinitely more advantageous than concentrating on sterilising women that have already produced several children. Gujarat has trained some 5,000 ANM’s in inserting IUDs using Zoey models. This has liberated women by acquiring a 10-year protection against pregnancy. With more than 5,00,000 successful insertions done on village women, Gujarat’s Public Health Commissioner Amarjit Singh recites his mantra, “women use this IUD but only if they feel comfortable.”
The third group of States comprises Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Punjab and Tamil Nadu. These States will account for hardly 15 per cent of the population growth by 2026 and have all achieved replacement levels of fertility with two children per woman. But here we may be in for some surprises. According to the Registrar General of India (SRS data 2006) Himachal Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu have higher marital fertility among 15 to 19-year-olds than Rajasthan or even Bihar. Two more south Indian States, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, have nearly twice the proportion of children born to pre-20-year-olds compared to Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. West Bengal is another surprise, being exceptionally prolific when it comes to childbirth among 15+ teenagers. This is best illustrated with an example:
Take Andhra Pradesh. Were all births under age 20 to be eliminated, the marital fertility would be reduced by 40 per cent each year, which would translate to over 20 million averted births in one generation of 60 years. But in the absence of efforts to push up the age at first birth, the reproductive process is starting too early and is propelling the population momentum, despite the average number of children being two or less than two per woman.
The Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929 was hardly implemented with any seriousness. That appears to be the fate of the new Prevention of Child Marriage Act 2006 also, which has made little dent on the States. Neither family nor society will raise a finger against early marriages, which are invariably followed by the first childbirth within a year. Something else is badly needed to slow the pace of the population momentum.
Remedial steps First, there should be a Compulsory Registration of Marriage Act with an office of Registrar General of Marriages to coordinate and monitor implementation of the Act countrywide. State Planning Boards should be presented with an annual picture of marriage registrations done and the median age of rural girls at the time of marriage. This information should be disaggregated and published throughout the State to give an idea of registrations done and gaps that continue. The birth of the first child after 19 needs to be incentivised and targeted to lowest wealth quintile, which is not the same thing as the entire BPL stock. The wanted fertility syndrome needs to be countered with state supported insurance for children lost, and employment guarantees for those that live. Concentrating on the lowest wealth quintile in every block, would make a lot of sense, as otherwise the richer among the poor would drain away whatever benefits might accrue.
India’s young population, far from being a boon, is a potential calamity. The births of children in quick succession when the girl is less than 20 is providing an unhealthy impetus to the population momentum besides denying women the right to decide what impacts their lives the most. Only if the economic consequences of the population momentum are understood, would governments take notice. Unfortunately that day is nowhere in sight.
A career civil servant with over 40 years experience, Shailaja Chandra is presently the Executive Director of the Jansankhya Sthirata Kosh (JSK), National Population Stabilisation Fund. The views expressed here are her own and do not reflect that of any organisation.
| The outlook for India’s youth is not as rosy as it is assumed. The population explosion and denying young women their right to decide on matters that impact their lives will only bring in more problems, not solutions… |
They deserve better: Better education, better opportunities...
Raise the topic of population and expect the following reactions: India will have the last laugh because its population is youthful and would continue to be so for decades more. Or, there is the Nandan Nilekeni idea which is fast becoming popular with optimistic urbanites — that a second hump of opportunity might miraculously emerge from the laggard Hindi belt States.
This oversimplification can cost us dearly. The demographic dividend argument is used in the West to signify the proportion of working people compared to retirees. In India, the so called dividend is actually represented by a disproportionately high number of young people who for the most part would be incapable of staying rooted to the school system and thereby end up uneducated and unemployable. In short, a burden on society.
Among them, girls will continue to have early pregnancies and their underweight infants will have poor chances of survival. For those that live, the cycle of malnutrition, stunting and wasting will be perpetrated and inequities will grow. Across the country, the regional and intra-State disparity would widen and resources for health and education would get sucked up or scattered before they can get to those in the greatest need. This is a recipe for disaster.
A development issue
Alok Ranjan Chaurasia and S. Gulati in “India the State of Population 2007” have divided the country into three groups. In the first group there are the Hindi belt States and some north-eastern states like Manipur and Meghalaya. Together they will account for more than half the population growth in the country by 2026. In these States, lowering fertility will be very difficult as the majority of couples use no contraception. Among the poorest families in these States, the “wanted fertility” factor, when parents want larger families as insurance against old age and to provide additional hands for work, is as high as 40 per cent of the total fertility. A “techno-medical model” of family planning as Chaurasia and Gulati call it, with a focus on female sterilisation will quite simply not work, because many couples actually want more children.
In the rest of the population of these States, including poorer families who do not want more children, a huge unmet demand for contraception exists. By present indications, the goal of two children per woman set for the country by 2010 will not even be achieved in the next two decades by these States. The New York Times mocked India’s “paradox of a proud democracy”, describing the persistence of child hunger and galloping malnutrition levels as worse than sub-Saharan African countries. Given this scenario, nothing can succeed unless the numbers become manageable. And waiting for trickle-down to happen, much less miracles to emerge from the sheer weight of a youthful population is being completely unrealistic.
In the second group, Gulati et al include States like Maharashtra, West Bengal, Gujarat, Haryana and Orissa, which have achieved or are about to achieve the two child goal. But even today these states measure the success of the family planning programme by sterilisation of women, usually undertaken after the demographic damage has been done. A stricter enforcement of the legal age of marriage and much greater stress on spacing methods, in the initial childbearing years, would be infinitely more advantageous than concentrating on sterilising women that have already produced several children. Gujarat has trained some 5,000 ANM’s in inserting IUDs using Zoey models. This has liberated women by acquiring a 10-year protection against pregnancy. With more than 5,00,000 successful insertions done on village women, Gujarat’s Public Health Commissioner Amarjit Singh recites his mantra, “women use this IUD but only if they feel comfortable.”
The third group of States comprises Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Punjab and Tamil Nadu. These States will account for hardly 15 per cent of the population growth by 2026 and have all achieved replacement levels of fertility with two children per woman. But here we may be in for some surprises. According to the Registrar General of India (SRS data 2006) Himachal Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu have higher marital fertility among 15 to 19-year-olds than Rajasthan or even Bihar. Two more south Indian States, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, have nearly twice the proportion of children born to pre-20-year-olds compared to Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. West Bengal is another surprise, being exceptionally prolific when it comes to childbirth among 15+ teenagers. This is best illustrated with an example:
Take Andhra Pradesh. Were all births under age 20 to be eliminated, the marital fertility would be reduced by 40 per cent each year, which would translate to over 20 million averted births in one generation of 60 years. But in the absence of efforts to push up the age at first birth, the reproductive process is starting too early and is propelling the population momentum, despite the average number of children being two or less than two per woman.
The Child Marriage Restraint Act 1929 was hardly implemented with any seriousness. That appears to be the fate of the new Prevention of Child Marriage Act 2006 also, which has made little dent on the States. Neither family nor society will raise a finger against early marriages, which are invariably followed by the first childbirth within a year. Something else is badly needed to slow the pace of the population momentum.
Remedial steps
India’s young population, far from being a boon, is a potential calamity. The births of children in quick succession when the girl is less than 20 is providing an unhealthy impetus to the population momentum besides denying women the right to decide what impacts their lives the most. Only if the economic consequences of the population momentum are understood, would governments take notice. Unfortunately that day is nowhere in sight.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
India’s mirage of youth is old age and wrinkled politics
The youth of this country are now beginning to ask this question. Have they been fooled into voting for the Congress-led coalition government into power for the second time? The average age of the Cabinet today is more than 67 years with the “eldest” being Foreign Minister S M Krishna just a whisker away from his 80th birthday. Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee (of TMC) is the youngest at 55.
There has been so much talk about the aspirations of a young India and leader after leader have espoused this view. But there falls the proverbial shadow between what is being preached and what is being practised. The Congress party takes pride into calling itself the party, which appeals to the youth – the Congress had severely criticised other parties on the issue of leadership (run by the grand old daddies).
But this sheen has almost vanished as the youth realise that there is no difference between the Congress and other parties. There is growing disillusion amongst the youth – they find the same old faces in power again and again – they want change – the Congress party has to look into their demands – because if this discontent builds up it can prove to be the party’s undoing in 2014.
Let’s take a look at the profile of the Cabinet and the party to get the clear picture: Dr M Singh, P Mukherjee, A K Antony, S M Krishna, V B Singh, M V Moily, S J Reddy, V Ravi, M Kharge, M S Gill, M L Vora, Ms M Kidwai and a lot of others.
Fallout of this: The present finance minister’s sagacity has never been in doubt, in spite being elected to the Lok Sabha for the first time he has held important cabinet portfolios since the time of Mrs Indira Gandhi. But age is catching up with him (he is 75); one can notice that he loses his temper far too often these days.
There have been many occasions when Pranab has lost his cool. Probably, he knows he is playing his last innings and in the final analysis it’s Dr Singh who pipped him to the post.
The performance of the Cabinet in the last year and a half has not been satisfactory –S M Krishna has blundered his way from one crisis to another. M S Gill finds himself in hot soup over corruption allegations and delays in the run up to the Commonwealth Games. J S Reddy has not been able to handle the urban affairs well – the flats scheduled to be ready for the officials of the Commonwealth will not be ready now. He looks weak and tired. Kharge, V B Singh, Moily and others have been equally ineffectual.
Antony as Defence Minister has been average while Home Minister P Chidambaram finds himself at loggerheads with many Congress ministers and leaders on a variety of issues.
The Congress party cannot expect to come back to power again merely on the basis of its glorious past. Its leaders would have to go back to people and connect themselves with the grass root workers all over again and face challenges from various corners. They have to prove themselves.
Be it Bihar, Uttar Pradesh or even Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh, the ground realities have been changing rapidly and the State leadership has been lacklustre.
The most glaring example is Bihar where the Congress party is not able to get a capable leader with pan state acceptability. In Uttar Pradesh, the situation is all the same. Minus the Congress President and Rahul Gandhi, who is the Congress leader at the moment to take on Mayawati and Mulayam Singh all-alone?
Jharkhand faces the same kind of situation where the Congress party could not get a capable leader and PCC Chief Pradeep Balmuchu lost his own seat in the last assembly polls. In Madhya Pradesh, Suresh Pachauri is still facing the ire of factional leaders supported by Digvijay Singh, Arjun Singh and a few more leaders.
Down South, one could see the new audacity of Jagan Mohan Reddy and the open war between R V Deshpande and D K Shiv Kumar in Karnataka.
One of the reasons why the Congress president does not want to remove Dr Manmohan Singh is his impeccable credentials and honesty. But then, how long should a common man suffer and how quickly would the pressing series of problems be allowed to linger? It is here that the Congress leadership has to think in a positive and prudent way and find a suitable way out to take the country out of the present state of affairs.
Ajay N. Jha is consultant to the Lok Sabha Speaker. For comments, write to
opinion@khaleejtimes.com
Youngest nation, oldest cabinet
India may have the youngest population of the world's biggest countries, but it has the oldest leader and oldest ministerial cabinet. In most of the world's top economies, the average age of a cabinet minister or his equivalent is just a decade or so higher than the median age of the population. But in India, the average age of a cabinet minister is almost two-and-a-half times the country's median age.
At 78, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is the oldest head of government in a major economy. In fact, Singh is only one of two heads of government older than 70 in 15 of the world's biggest economies, which account for more than 70% of the world's GDP and 60% of the population. Italy's Silvio Berlusconi, 74, is the other. Four leaders are in their 60s; all of them from Asia. The rest are either in their 50s or their 40s, with Britain's David Cameron the youngest at 43.
Of course, Singh is not an exceptionally old leader by Indian standards. Atal Behari Vajpayee and P V Narasimha Rao, for instance, were in the prime minister's chair when they were in their late 70s. Morarji Desai became PM at the age of 81.
Nor is Singh the world's oldest head of government. All of th following are older: Robert Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe, Abdullah bin Abd al- Aziz al-Saud, king of Saudi Arabia, Abdoulaye Wade, president of Senegal, Hosni Mubarak, president of Egypt, Raul Castro, president of Cuba and Mwai Kibaki, president of Kenya.
But India is unlike these countries in that it is a multi-party democracy and our prime minister clearly stands out when compared with his democratically elected counterparts in much of the world. Even big economies that are not democratic, have younger leaders with China's Wen Jiabao much younger at 68 and ripe to be replaced by a much younger person in 2012 when China chooses the fifth generation of Communist party leaders.
UPA 2's Cabinet has an average age almost two-and-a-half times the country's median age. The average age of the 33 cabinet ministers is 64.4 years, which is 14 years more than the recently elected British cabinet, the youngest cabinet in our list. Averaging 61.2 years, China is the only other country where the average age of the cabinet is above 60 years.
But comparing just the average ages of different cabinets doesn't tell the full story. The fact is that India has the lowest median age — the level at which half the population is younger and half older — of 25.9 years on this list of the 15 largest economies. It, therefore, also has the largest mismatch between the age of its population and the age of its leaders.
The difference between the average age of India's cabinet and the median age of its population is almost 39 years, which is three times the gap for the developed countries on this list. In fact, with the exception of the US, where this age difference is above 20 years, all the other G-8 countries have cabinet ministers on average less than 20 years older than the median age of the country.
The list indicates that developing countries tend to have a higher age difference between their leaders and the population. This gap is 31 for Brazil, 28 for Indonesia, and 26 for China. But remember that China's median age is 10 years more than India's, so a gap of 26 years is much less significant.
Could the response to a young leader like Rahul Gandhi, or his father Rajiv Gandhi in an earlier era, be a manifestation of a yearning among many for this age gap between the leader and the led to be reduced? Your reading is as good as ours.
At 78, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is the oldest head of government in a major economy. In fact, Singh is only one of two heads of government older than 70 in 15 of the world's biggest economies, which account for more than 70% of the world's GDP and 60% of the population. Italy's Silvio Berlusconi, 74, is the other. Four leaders are in their 60s; all of them from Asia. The rest are either in their 50s or their 40s, with Britain's David Cameron the youngest at 43.
Of course, Singh is not an exceptionally old leader by Indian standards. Atal Behari Vajpayee and P V Narasimha Rao, for instance, were in the prime minister's chair when they were in their late 70s. Morarji Desai became PM at the age of 81.
Nor is Singh the world's oldest head of government. All of th following are older: Robert Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe, Abdullah bin Abd al- Aziz al-Saud, king of Saudi Arabia, Abdoulaye Wade, president of Senegal, Hosni Mubarak, president of Egypt, Raul Castro, president of Cuba and Mwai Kibaki, president of Kenya.
But India is unlike these countries in that it is a multi-party democracy and our prime minister clearly stands out when compared with his democratically elected counterparts in much of the world. Even big economies that are not democratic, have younger leaders with China's Wen Jiabao much younger at 68 and ripe to be replaced by a much younger person in 2012 when China chooses the fifth generation of Communist party leaders.
UPA 2's Cabinet has an average age almost two-and-a-half times the country's median age. The average age of the 33 cabinet ministers is 64.4 years, which is 14 years more than the recently elected British cabinet, the youngest cabinet in our list. Averaging 61.2 years, China is the only other country where the average age of the cabinet is above 60 years.
But comparing just the average ages of different cabinets doesn't tell the full story. The fact is that India has the lowest median age — the level at which half the population is younger and half older — of 25.9 years on this list of the 15 largest economies. It, therefore, also has the largest mismatch between the age of its population and the age of its leaders.
The difference between the average age of India's cabinet and the median age of its population is almost 39 years, which is three times the gap for the developed countries on this list. In fact, with the exception of the US, where this age difference is above 20 years, all the other G-8 countries have cabinet ministers on average less than 20 years older than the median age of the country.
The list indicates that developing countries tend to have a higher age difference between their leaders and the population. This gap is 31 for Brazil, 28 for Indonesia, and 26 for China. But remember that China's median age is 10 years more than India's, so a gap of 26 years is much less significant.
Could the response to a young leader like Rahul Gandhi, or his father Rajiv Gandhi in an earlier era, be a manifestation of a yearning among many for this age gap between the leader and the led to be reduced? Your reading is as good as ours.
The New Activists
Gone are the days when khadi-clad activists would accost passersby on street corners. Gone are the days of armchair philanthropists with more talk than walk. The new activist is not only more socially and economically savvy, but they look the part too.
Right at that stage of the evolutionary calendar when the race to ‘make it’ in the world begins — when wrapped in self-indulgence many begin their experiments, and adventures of varied kinds — a few choose to go off course. They are equally, or rather, more accomplished than the herd chasing six-digit salary packets. It’s just that they have a higher calling — society. With an abandon, these young people have embraced a new zeitgeist of idealistic visions which they see no reason to temper. They are fuelled by a desire to make a difference, and choose to be social change-makers.
The enduring image of activists and social workers has been that of a khadi-clad, gaunt, do-gooders who in reality looked more impoverished than the masses they aimed to emancipate. They were emphatic talkers who were well-versed in theories of social change and its ilk — all of which hardly translates to action on ground. The enormous value they placed upon change, transformation and movement were just that — something intangible that spawns nothing concrete.
Not so, with the new wave social workers. In fact, besides the ideals, these nouveau activists have nothing in common with their predecessors. No distributing pamphlets, sticking posters or sporting slogan-boards. No noisy speeches on shaky podiums.
And definitely not the torn jhola (bag). They carry smart laptop bags instead. They hate to waste paper, so campaigning is mostly virtual, done over the Web. Facebook and other social networking sites are the preferred platforms to announce movements. What’s best, they are well-educated. Armed with university degrees, and sharp intellects, these young social workers apply their mind to social problems, and tackle them with a hitherto unseen focus and clarity; their approach clearly solution-driven.
Bangalore has its share of them. In fact, with its title of a vibrant technology innovation space, this city is seen as an ideal laboratory for social experiments and have lured a whole set of young change-makers.
This is precisely the lure that drew 23-year-old Keerthi Kiran, a graduate from BITS Pilani, here. He runs Grassroutes, a fellowship programme “which funds youth to go on roadtrips across India, discover and work with change-makers, do their bit to change the world and inspire more youth into social action”.
While at college, Kiran and friends — Abhilash Ravishankar, Sriram, Shravya and Goutam — were part of the Centre for Entrepreneurial Leadership cell. Their experiences working with underprivileged women and children urged them to work in the social sector. They set up a group, Youth Factor (Yofa) to “work on engaging youth into social action through novel and exciting initiatives”. The underlying philosophy of Grassroutes is more or less the same. “Young people need to know why they want to bring social change. To ask the right questions, they need the right exposure and experience,” says Kiran. They decided to base Grassroutes in Bangalore because here, among all other Indian cities, Kiran, found the right climate for social innovation. “Bangalore is the best for all kinds of start-up activities. This city encourages people who want to do different things.”
Kiran chose to be a social activist for two reasons: One, the inherent challenge that the development sector posed. Second, his passion for the cause. “I was always interested in the state of the country and our society. I could see that anyone ready to apply his mind can bring about tangible, sustainable results. I could do something, instead of just talking about it.”
Kiran has been working in the development sector for two-and-a-half years. Ignoring the traditional milestones of passing out of college and grabbing the most well-paying job has been rewarding for Kiran. At the end of every edition of the programme, he gets his validation — “When a young person understands why India should be a welfare state,” he says.
Kakoli Das took a little while to heed her social calling. After graduating from the National Institute of Technology, Silchar, she worked with a couple of MNCs in India and the US, before coming back to Assam, her home state. Her move to Assam was a byproduct of socio-cultural forces, and the weather of unrest in her state. “I saw a huge disparity — the abundance on one side and the utter lack on the other,” she says.
A slew of social disparities played out in her mind for a while, and she decided to tackle income generation. She chose the craft sector for multiple reasons. Almost 70 per cent of the Assamese population depended on handloom or handicrafts for their primary or secondary income. Almost every house had a loom. The maximum impact, Das realised, would come if she worked within this sector. Also, the people by tradition had fantastic skill sets — weaving and craft.
“There was excess labour, ready infrastructure, and also the skill. All that was required was the monetisation,” says Das, explaining the logic behind her decision.
http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_the-new-activists_1430217
Right at that stage of the evolutionary calendar when the race to ‘make it’ in the world begins — when wrapped in self-indulgence many begin their experiments, and adventures of varied kinds — a few choose to go off course. They are equally, or rather, more accomplished than the herd chasing six-digit salary packets. It’s just that they have a higher calling — society. With an abandon, these young people have embraced a new zeitgeist of idealistic visions which they see no reason to temper. They are fuelled by a desire to make a difference, and choose to be social change-makers.
The enduring image of activists and social workers has been that of a khadi-clad, gaunt, do-gooders who in reality looked more impoverished than the masses they aimed to emancipate. They were emphatic talkers who were well-versed in theories of social change and its ilk — all of which hardly translates to action on ground. The enormous value they placed upon change, transformation and movement were just that — something intangible that spawns nothing concrete.
Not so, with the new wave social workers. In fact, besides the ideals, these nouveau activists have nothing in common with their predecessors. No distributing pamphlets, sticking posters or sporting slogan-boards. No noisy speeches on shaky podiums.
And definitely not the torn jhola (bag). They carry smart laptop bags instead. They hate to waste paper, so campaigning is mostly virtual, done over the Web. Facebook and other social networking sites are the preferred platforms to announce movements. What’s best, they are well-educated. Armed with university degrees, and sharp intellects, these young social workers apply their mind to social problems, and tackle them with a hitherto unseen focus and clarity; their approach clearly solution-driven.
Bangalore has its share of them. In fact, with its title of a vibrant technology innovation space, this city is seen as an ideal laboratory for social experiments and have lured a whole set of young change-makers.
This is precisely the lure that drew 23-year-old Keerthi Kiran, a graduate from BITS Pilani, here. He runs Grassroutes, a fellowship programme “which funds youth to go on roadtrips across India, discover and work with change-makers, do their bit to change the world and inspire more youth into social action”.
While at college, Kiran and friends — Abhilash Ravishankar, Sriram, Shravya and Goutam — were part of the Centre for Entrepreneurial Leadership cell. Their experiences working with underprivileged women and children urged them to work in the social sector. They set up a group, Youth Factor (Yofa) to “work on engaging youth into social action through novel and exciting initiatives”. The underlying philosophy of Grassroutes is more or less the same. “Young people need to know why they want to bring social change. To ask the right questions, they need the right exposure and experience,” says Kiran. They decided to base Grassroutes in Bangalore because here, among all other Indian cities, Kiran, found the right climate for social innovation. “Bangalore is the best for all kinds of start-up activities. This city encourages people who want to do different things.”
Kiran chose to be a social activist for two reasons: One, the inherent challenge that the development sector posed. Second, his passion for the cause. “I was always interested in the state of the country and our society. I could see that anyone ready to apply his mind can bring about tangible, sustainable results. I could do something, instead of just talking about it.”
Kiran has been working in the development sector for two-and-a-half years. Ignoring the traditional milestones of passing out of college and grabbing the most well-paying job has been rewarding for Kiran. At the end of every edition of the programme, he gets his validation — “When a young person understands why India should be a welfare state,” he says.
Kakoli Das took a little while to heed her social calling. After graduating from the National Institute of Technology, Silchar, she worked with a couple of MNCs in India and the US, before coming back to Assam, her home state. Her move to Assam was a byproduct of socio-cultural forces, and the weather of unrest in her state. “I saw a huge disparity — the abundance on one side and the utter lack on the other,” she says.
A slew of social disparities played out in her mind for a while, and she decided to tackle income generation. She chose the craft sector for multiple reasons. Almost 70 per cent of the Assamese population depended on handloom or handicrafts for their primary or secondary income. Almost every house had a loom. The maximum impact, Das realised, would come if she worked within this sector. Also, the people by tradition had fantastic skill sets — weaving and craft.
“There was excess labour, ready infrastructure, and also the skill. All that was required was the monetisation,” says Das, explaining the logic behind her decision.
http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_the-new-activists_1430217
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)