text:
Data: The Decline of NOTA Vote Share Continues Even in 2023
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 25, 2023
It has been 10 years since the introduction of NOTA on the EVM for Assembly & Lok Sabha elections. The data of the last 10 years indicates that NOTA has lost favour among people as evident with its declining vote share. The trend continued even in 2023 Karnataka assembly elections.
The assembly elections for Karnataka were concluded recently and the results were declared on 13 May 2023. The incumbent Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost the elections with Indian National Congress comfortably crossing the required majority of 113 seats by winning 135 seats. This is the second assembly elections in Karnataka since NOTA was introduced in the ballot paper in 2013.
In our earlier stories on NOTA, we highlighted that there is a declining trend in the votes polled for NOTA. This is the 10 year since NOTA became part of the elections in India.  In our earlier story on NOTA, we analysed the trends in assembly elections across the five states of Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Goa & Manipur, whose elections were conducted during February-March 2022. Since then, 5 more states went to the polls apart from Karnataka.  Gujarat & Himachal Pradesh had their assembly elections in the latter part of 2022, while the three Northeastern states of Tripura, Meghalaya & Nagaland had their elections in February’2023.
In this story, we look at the trends for NOTA across these 6 states – Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Tripura, Meghalaya, Nagaland, and Karnataka.  The data for the analysis is taken from the Datasets available on Dataful, which are prepared from the information published by the Election Commission of India.
NOTA Vote share in 2023 so far at 0.72%, least since introduction
Continuing with the declining trend of NOTA vote share as highlighted in our earlier stories, the share of votes polled for NOTA across the 4 state elections in 2023 is 0.72%. In the case of Karnataka, it is still lower at 0.68%.
In the earlier story, we highlighted that the average share of NOTA for the assembly elections across the five states at the beginning of 2022 was 0.7%. The annual average improved to 0.88% after the elections later that year i.e., in Gujarat & Himachal Pradesh. Despite this improvement, the average vote share for NOTA in 2022 is still less than the previous year.
Assembly elections in 5 more states are expected to be held in the later part of 2023. This includes four large states – Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh & Telangana. The NOTA vote share for 2023 will be dependent on these elections.
Share of NOTA vote share fell compared to the last elections except in Tripura
As highlighted above, assembly elections for Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh were conducted latter part of 2022. In both these states, the share of NOTA votes was lesser in 2022 compared to that of previous elections in 2017.
Except in 2 seats in Gujarat, NOTA share did not cross 3% in any of the seats across six states
In the 2018 Karnataka Assembly elections, NOTA share was 4.77% in the Bangalore South constituency. During the same elections, 69 seats had a share of NOTA between 1-3%, while in 152 seats, NOTA polled less than 1%. In the recently concluded 2023 elections in Karnataka, the share of NOTA in Bangalore-South was 1.03%. It is among the 34 seats in the 2023 elections where the share of NOTA was between 1-3%. The number of seats with NOTA less than 1% increased to 190. None of the seats had a NOTA share of more than 3%.
The same is the case with the three Northeastern states which went to the polls in 2023 with none of the constituencies polling more than 3% for NOTA. In the case of both Meghalaya and Nagaland, there is an increase in the number of seats that polled by less than 1% for NOTA. As was the case in the previous elections in 2018, the majority of the seats polled less than 1%.
However, contrary to the trend in other states, the share of NOTA has increased in Tripura during 2023 compared to 2018. This is reflected in an increase in the number of seats that polled more than 1% in the 2023 elections. In 2018, there were 27 constituencies that polled between 1-3%. This increased to 50 out of 60 total constituencies in 2023. On the other hand, 66 of the 68 seats in Himachal Pradesh polled less than 1% during Assembly elections conducted in late 2022.
Gujarat is the only state among these 6 states that have Assembly seats that polled more than 3% for NOTA.  Both these are ST reserved seats. The ST reserved seat of Khedbrahma polled 3.56% for NOTA while in the case of Fatepura, it is 3.11%. In the 2017 Assembly elections in Gujarat, the share of NOTA was 2.7% and 3.47% respectively in these two seats. During the 2017 Assembly elections in Gujarat, there were 10 seats that polled more than 3% for NOTA, with 7 of them being ST reserved seats.
In 8 constituencies each in Karnataka, Meghalaya and Tripura, votes polled for NOTA were more than the victory margin, whereas this was the case in 5 constituencies in the Gujarat Assembly elections of 2022.
Fall in the share of NOTA among SC & ST seats, but still higher than General seats
The fall in the NOTA for Gujarat is visible even across the reserved seats. In the 2017 Assembly elections, NOTA vote share among ST seats was 2.4% which fell to 2.07% in 2022. The same is the case with SC-reserved seats, wherein the share of NOTA votes fell from 1.9% in 2017 to 1.6% in 2022.
Similar is the case with Karnataka where the NOTA vote share in SC reserved seats fell from 0.89% in 2018 to 0.79% in 2023. In the case of ST reserved seats, it fell from 1.08% in 2018 to 0.8% in 2023. However, it must be noted that the despite the fall in NOTA vote share, the share of NOTA votes is still higher in reserved seats than in the General seats.
The four large states of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Telangana & Rajasthan which go for elections later in 2023 have a sizeable number of SC & ST reserved seats. It needs to be seen if the same trend continues in these states also.


text:
Data: The history of Disinvestment in India & Political Trends
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 12, 2021
During the Budget 2021-22 presentation, it was announced that two Public Sector Banks and one General Insurance Company would be privatized. Disinvestments have often been used by the governments as a means to shore up receipts and reduce the fiscal deficit. In this detailed data story about disinvestment since 1991-92, we look at the numbers as well as the political trends in disinvestment.
During the 2021-22 budget presentation in the Lok Sabha on 01 February 2021, the Finance Minister announced that two public sector banks and one general insurance company are expected to be disinvested this year. Disinvestment refers to the sale of shares of Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) by the government. In this article, we briefly look at the history of disinvestment and determine the political trends of disinvestment in the country.
There are two major reasons offered by the government for disinvestment. One is to provide fiscal support and the other is to improve the efficiency of the enterprise. The fiscal support argument dictates that the government’s resources are limited, and these resources should be devoted to areas of social priority (such as health, family welfare, education, etc). More resources can be devoted to these priority areas by releasing resources locked up in non-strategic public sector enterprises. The second reason for disinvestment dictates that it will improve the efficiency of the enterprise. If the extent of disinvestment is such that a wider share of ownership is encouraged, it will introduce competition and market discipline.
There are primarily three different approaches to disinvestments:
Change in Government Policy regarding Disinvestment
In the Industrial Policy of 1956, 17 industries were reserved exclusively for the public sector and there were 12 other industries that were to be progressively state-owned. In 1991, there was a radical change in the government’s policy towards the public sector. The domestic economy, where PSUs had served as engines of growth, had started welcoming private players. After 1991, only eight industries were reserved for the public sector, including defence production, atomic energy, coal and lignite, mineral oils, iron ore, manganese, gold and diamond, atomic minerals, and railways.
The new policy for public sector disinvestment stated that the government will run the public sector on sound commercial principles. Chronically sick public sector units will be referred to Board for Industrial and Financial Re-construction (BIFR) for examining their viability. Another important feature of the new disinvestment policy was that 20% shares of selected profit-making public-sector units can be sold to financial institutions, mutual funds, etc. These institutions will hold the shares for a specified period of time after which they will be permitted to sell the shares in the share market.
In 1999, the government classified public sector enterprises into strategic and non-strategic units for the purpose of disinvestment. Strategic public sector enterprises would be those in the areas of defence production, atomic energy and railway transport. All other public sector enterprises were to be considered non-strategic.
The first milestone in the history of disinvestment of PSUs dates back to 1999. Prior to this, governments had pursued disinvestment but with considerable restraint, indulging mostly in minority stake sale of selected PSUs (as evident in the year-wise breakup of disinvestment outlined below). Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s term as Prime Minister, heading a National Democratic Alliance (NDA) Government between 1999 and 2004, is famously described as the golden period for privatisation of public sector undertakings (PSUs). In fact, in December 1999, under the NDA regime, a dedicated ministry and a separate cabinet committee on divestment were set up.
Let’s take a look at the disinvestment earnings of the government since 1991. The CAG’s 2017-18 audit report on the Union government accounts (No. 2 of 2019, released in February 2019) says “disinvestment constitutes a major portion of capital receipts” of the central government. Governments have raised more than Rs. 5 lakh crores so far (from 1991 till date) through disinvestments. The following graph captures the trend of disinvestment and the resultant earnings over the last three decades.
Below is a year-wise break-up of disinvestment and receipts, sourced from the data published by the Department of Investment & Public Asset Management, Department of Public Enterprises, in form of Annual Year Books and Public Enterprises Survey Reports, and the BSEPSU.
Political Trends in Disinvestment
In order to understand the trend of disinvestment under various regimes, let’s take a look at the annual Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSE) target vs Achievement since 1991-92.
While there is no significant difference in the disinvestment achievement rates under these two regimes, there is a huge difference in the average annual total receipts from disinvestment under the two regimes. As outlined in the graph, the BJP-led government’s average receipts from disinvestment are almost three times Congress-led government’s average receipts from disinvestment. The BJP-led government’s average annual receipt from disinvestment stands at ₹ 29,381 crores – more than threefold of Congress-led government’s average annual receipts from disinvestment at ₹ 8,274 crores.
The Hindu article dated 18 November 2018, which also analyses the data released by the Department of Investment and Public Asset Management (DIPAM) up to 8 November 2018 reiterates this observation. The article argues that the ‘total disinvestment’ done by BJP-led governments (up till 8 November 2018) was almost twice than that done by the Congress-led governments. It also highlighted the point that BJP-led governments account for 58% of all the disinvestment that has taken place since 1991.
Featured Image: Disinvestment in India

source: news-factly

created: February 12, 2021

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Data: The Lok Sabha is Convening for Fewer Days in The Last Few Decades
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 8, 2022
The 2022 winter session of the 17th Lok Sabha began on 07 December 2022. The house will be in session for a total of 17 days. Data from the ‘Statistical Handbook 2021’, released by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs indicates that the number of days the Lok Sabha convenes has reduced progressively over the different terms.
The Winter Session of Parliament began on 07 December 2022. This would be the 10 Session of the current 17 Lok Sabha. Rajya Sabha, which is a Permanent body will be convening for its 258 session.  The session is scheduled to be held till 29 December 2022, with a total of 17 working days.
A total of 16 new bills are planned to be tabled for the first time in this session of the parliament. A few of the bills which were introduced earlier will also be taken up for discussion and further due process.  The business conducted in both houses of the parliament is key in shaping the legislation, and discussion on pressing issues both of which will have an impact on the governance of the country. Hence, these sessions are important and a key feature of India’s democracy.
Over the years, many important issues were taken up, and debated and various landmark bills were passed. With another important session of the parliament underway, we look at data related to the previous Parliament sessions. The data is sourced from the ‘Statistical Handbook 2021’, released by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs.
First Lok Sabha convened for the greatest number of days in session
The first Lok Sabha was constituted on 02 April 1952. It was dissolved on 04 April 1957. During this period, the Lok Sabha actually convened for a total of 677 days across 15 sessions. This is also the greatest number of days that Lok Sabha has convened in a term.  The actual number of days that the house was in session is considered for this analysis.
This is followed by the Fifth Lok Sabha, which conducted business for 613 days but across 18 sessions. The 5 Lok Sabha was constituted on 15 March 1971 and dissolved on 18 January 1977. The 21-month emergency from 1975 to 1977 was during the tenure of the 5 Lok Sabha.
Parliament was in session for the least number of days during Twelfth Lok Sabha. It convened for 88 days across 4 sessions. It ought to be noted that the 12th Lok Sabha did not complete its 5-year term. It was constituted on 10 March 1998 and dissolved on 26 April 1999 after the ruling NDA government lost its majority. This was the second consecutive Lok Sabha, which did not complete its term. The earlier Lok Sabha i.e., the 11th Lok Sabha lasted for around 18 months. Lok Sabha was in session for 125 days across 6 sessions in the 11 Lok Sabha. It must be noted that the 4, 6 & 9 Lok Sabha terms also did not complete their full five-year term.
First Lok Sabha met for the greatest number of days per year on Average
The variance in the number of days the Lok Sabha met in a particular term is due to the total tenure of the respective terms.  As noted earlier, the 4, 6, 9, 11 & 12 terms of Lok Sabha did not complete the full tenure of 5 years. The tenure of these terms also varies with the term of the 11 Lok Sabha being only 13 months.
Hence, a yearly average of the number of days that the respective Lok Sabha was in session provides for better comparison across Lok Sabha terms. For this analysis, we have rounded the term of Lok Sabha to the nearest half year. For instance, the term of the fourth Lok Sabha was 3 years and 10 months which was rounded off to 4 years.
The First Lok Sabha met the highest number of days in a year with 135 days on average. The fourth Lok Sabha was next with an annual average of 117 days in session. The yearly average number of days in the session was more than 100 for the first to the sixth Lok Sabha, after which it progressively reduced.  Among the Lok Sabha terms which completed their complete five-year tenure, the 4 Lok Sabha is next only to the first Lok Sabha in terms of the number of days in session per year. The 9 Lok Sabha which lasted for about only 1.5 years and had two different governments during the term met for only 73 days on average.
The yearly average from the fourteenth Lok Sabha has been less than 70 days. The average per year is still lower for the current 17 Lok Sabha term with 60 days per year. However, one also needs to factor in the COVID-19 pandemic which impacted the number of days that the house could convene during 2020 and 2021.
Declining trend in the Average number of days met per session
Consistent with the earlier highlighted trends, the first Lok Sabha spent the highest days per session on average. It conducted its business for an average of 45 days per session. The next highest number of days was the fourth Lok Sabha with 39 days on average across its 12 sessions, followed by the Second & Third terms which met on average for 36 days per session across their 16 sessions.
The fifth Lok Sabha, which convened for the highest number of sessions with 18, has met for around 34 days on average per session. There is a decline in the average number of days per session, compared to Lok Sabha terms between 1952 and 1977.  In the most recent four complete terms, Lok Sabha met on an average of 24, 20, 23 and 19 days respectively per session.  The least though was the 9 Lok Sabha term, which met for an average of 14 days per session.
Lok Sabha convened for the highest number of days in the 12th Session of the First Lok Sabha
The Lok Sabha convened for a total of 76 days during the 12 session of the first Lok Sabha. Following this is the 6 session of the first Lok Sabha where the house was convened for 74 days. The third session of the first Lok Sabha convened for 72 days. These are only three sessions that convened for more than 70 days. There are multiple sessions where the house convened for only a day during the 6th, 9th & 11th Lok Sabha terms. These were also the terms that did not have a full five-year term. The single-day sessions were regarding the resignation of a Prime Minister.

created: December 8, 2022


text:
Data: The number of forcibly displaced people more than doubled in the last 10 years as per UNHCR
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
June 27, 2022
UNHCR recently released a ‘Global Trends – Forced Displacement in 2021’ report that provides insights into the magnitude of this global problem along with the spatial & temporal trends. As per this report, by the end of 2021, the number of people forcibly displaced is around 89.3 million, more than twice the 42.7 million by the end of 2012.
The ongoing Russia-Ukraine war has created a Humanitarian crisis, with the latest estimates indicating that there could be around 5.2 million refugees from Ukraine across Europe. It is estimated that around 8 million have crossed the border from Ukraine since the escalation of the conflict in late February 2022. The destruction of civilian spaces and the proximity to the conflict zones have forced people to abandon their homes and seek safety.
This crisis adds to the millions of other forcibly displaced individuals across the world. Persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations and other events in various places across the world have contributed to this forced displacement. Recently, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) released a ‘Global Trends – Forced Displacement in 2021’ report that provides insights into the magnitude of this global problem along with the spatial & temporal trends of forced displacement of people. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency is a global organization dedicated to saving lives, protecting rights, and building a better future for refugees, forcibly displaced communities, and stateless people.
The number of forcibly displaced people has more than doubled in ten years
As per UNHCR, by the end of 2021, the number of people forcibly displaced is around 89.3 million. Around 6.9 million additional people were added in 2021.  Out of the 89.3 million, 27.1 million are refugees, 53.2 million are Internally Displaced People (IDP), 4.6 million are asylum seekers and another 4.4 million are Venezuelans who are displaced abroad.
The trends over the last 10 years indicate and a year-on-year increase in the number of people displaced globally, with a higher increase observed in recent years. Nearly 20 million were displaced in the last four years (2017-2021).  In fact, over the last 10 years (2012-2021), the number of displaced people has more than doubled. By the end of 2012, there were 42.7 million displaced people globally.
There is a higher growth of IDP. In 2012, there were 17.7 million IDPs and 10.5 million refugees. While the internal displacements continue to be higher, the number of people crossing borders to seek refuge is fewer compared to pre-pandemic levels, primarily due to COVID-19-related restrictions of movement.
Those forcibly displaced constitute 1 out of 88 in the world population by end of 2021, while in 2012, it was 1 in 167. This implies that the growth of the displaced population has outpaced the growth of the world population, highlighting the severity of the problem.
41% of those forcibly displaced are children under the age of 17 years, higher than the share of children in the world population (31%), indicating the higher vulnerability of children. 53% of the displaced belong to the age group of 18-59. There isn’t much variance between the male & female populations being displaced with a 51:49 ratio of males & females among the displaced population by end of 2021.
The war in Ukraine has already added around 7 million displaced people and as per estimates, the total number of people displaced globally would cross 100 million by the end of 2022.
UNHCR identifies 94.7 million people as a population of concern
As indicated above, the total number of forcibly displaced people includes refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced people, and Venezuelans displaced abroad. It also includes refugees and other displaced people who are not covered by UNHCR’s mandate. However, the forcibly displaced numbers do not include other categories like returnees, non-displaced state-less people, etc. But these categories are of concern to UNHCR, and it is mandated to protect and assist them.
The categories of people that are considered as Population of Concern to UNHCR, and whom UNHCR is mandated to protect include – people who are forcibly displaced, those who returned home within the previous year, those who are stateless, and other groups of concern to whom UNHCR has extended its protection or provided assistance on a humanitarian basis. By end of 2021, the total population of concern for UNHCR was 94.7 million. In 2020, there were 91.9 million people of concern for UNHCR.
23 countries faced high or medium-intensity conflicts in 2021
The report highlights during 2021, several existing conflicts have escalated, and new conflicts flared up. Around 23 countries with a combined population of 850 million faced high or medium-intensity conflicts in 2021. The number of countries in conflict has doubled compared to 2012.
12 countries in Africa have seen displacements due to conflicts in 2021. These include – Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, South Sudan, Mozambique, Nigeria, Niger, Central African Republic (CAR), Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Chad, Mali & Burkina Faso. Among these countries, DRC has around 3 million people who were internally displaced. About half a million in CAR and another half-million in Sudan were newly displaced in 2021.
Extreme poverty & under-development have contributed to the increasing displacements in Burkina Faso & Mali.
The continued instability in Syria has resulted in more new displacements. Other Asian countries which have witnessed new displacements were Yemen, Afghanistan & Myanmar. In Latin America, more Venezuelans were displaced abroad once the COVID-19 restrictions were lifted. Meanwhile, the pollical crisis in Nicaragua has resulted in more than 100 thousand new asylum applications.
The ongoing crisis in Ukraine is not only the largest since World War II but is also the fastest. The only relief about displacements from Ukraine is that these refugees are being settled in higher-income European countries. The situation is dire for displacements in other countries, with many of the people that are forced to flee being impacted by food crises. Around 82% of Internally displaced people and 67% of refugees are from countries with food crises. For instance, in Afghanistan, 55% of the population did not have enough to eat each day. Nearly 40% of the refugees and asylum seekers are hosted in countries with food crises.
Syria is the country of origin for the highest number of people displaced across the borders
In 2012, the number of refugees worldwide was 10.5 million. During the 10-year period (2012-21), the number more than doubled to 21.3 million by the end of 2021. During this period, the number of Venezuelan refugees increased from 3.9 million to 4.4 million. Around 794 thousand people were provided with international protection in 2021.
83% of the people fleeing their country of origin are from 10 countries. People fleeing Syria and being hosted in other countries are the highest with 6.8 million i.e., 27% of the global refugee population. In 2021, the number of Syrian refugees increased by 145 thousand, aided by new births and a rise in recognition in the host countries. Syrian refugees are being hosted in 129 countries. Germany & Austria are among the leading nations that have provided recognition for the refugees from Syria. However, the highest number of Syrian refugees are still hosted in the neighbouring countries of Turkiye (erstwhile Turkey), Lebanon & Jordan, while Germany is the largest non-neighbouring host country.
Venezuela is the second-largest country of origin for refugees with 4.6 million. Most of them are hosted and recognized in other countries in the Americas. Around 2.7 million Afghan refugees are being hosted in 98 countries. The African countries of South Sudan, DP Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Central African Republic, and Eretria are among the top 10 countries of origin and contribute to a combined 6.18 million refugees from these countries.  Rohingyas are among the highest displaced community with the numbers increasing to 1.2 million, and most of them being hosted in Bangladesh.
Turkiye is the host of the highest number of refugees with 3.75 million refugees, with almost all of them being Syrians. 72% of the global refugee population is hosted by neighbouring countries. 27% of the refugees are hosted by least-developed countries while 83% of the population is hosted by low- & middle-income countries, causing more stress to the host countries.
3/4th of the new Internal displacements in 2021 were in Sub-Saharan Africa
People displaced inside their own countries constitute most of the global forcibly displaced population. Armed conflicts, generalized violence, human rights violations, etc., are among the major contributing factors to internal displacements.  By the end of 2021, UNHCR reported situations of Internal displacements in 35 countries. The number of Internally Displaced People (IDPs) increased from 17.7 million in 2012 to 51.3 million in 2021.
Nearly 3/4 of the new internal displacements in 2021 are reported from Sub-Saharan African countries, especially with the countries in East and Horn of Africa and the great lakes region. 4.1 million IDPs were reported from Ethiopia, Somalia, South Sudan & Sudan. In West & Central Africa, around 1.6 million new displacements were reported in 2021. Chronic under-development, economic inequality, and other socio-economic factors are the key drivers of internal displacement in West & Central African countries.
Among the IDPs recognized and protected by UNHCR, Syria has the highest number of Internal Displacements with 6.9 million people. It accounts for 1/3 of the population residing in Syria. 6.8 million people in Columbia are recognized as internally displaced.
This data recorded by UNHCR only includes displacement due to conflict and violence. As per Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, there are another 23.7 million internal displacements due to disasters & climate change. Among those displaced due to disasters in 2021, the highest was in China with 6 million. Philippines & India have the next highest internally displaced populations due to disasters in 2021 with 5.7 million and 4.9 million respectively.
4.3 million State-less people by the end of 2021
Apart from the refugees, IPDs and asylum seekers, there are around 4.3 million people who are stateless or of undetermined nationality. They are not recognized by any of the countries and hence are unable to access basic rights. Their number has increased by 158 thousand in 2021 compared to 2020. States recognizing the existence of State-less people and gathering information about them is one of the major challenges, post which efforts can be made to find solutions for their resettlement.
5.7 million displaced people have returned to their place of origin in 2021
While there were new situations in 2021 that have contributed to an increase in the forcibly displaced population worldwide, the existing situations continue to remain unsolved and in need of durable solutions. Enabling refugees to rebuild their lives and lead a life of safety & dignity by providing durable solutions remains a priority for UNHCR.
Voluntary repatriation, local integration, and resettlement to a third country are among the durable solutions for the refugees. Returning to the home country is the preferred solution for most of the refugees, but that is dependent on the political stability and economic opportunities in their countries of origin.
429.3 thousand refugees returned to their countries of origin in 2021, with the returns in that year compared to pre-pandemic years. 2/3rd of the refugees who returned was to South Sudan. 36.5 thousand Syrian refugees returned to their home country in 2021.
Resettlement is another option exercised by the UNHCR to protect the most vulnerable refugees. 86% of those resettled are victims of torture and abuse, with most of them being women & children. Despite an increase in 2021, the number of people resettled remains lower compared to pre-pandemic years. The share of those resettled among those who need resettlement is traditionally lower.
Overall, 5.7 million displaced people returned to their place of origin, of which 5.3 million were IDPs. Around 57.5 thousand refugees were resettled in 2021.
Featured Image: UNHCR’s Global Trends Forced Displacement in 2021 report


text:
Number of registered Cyber-crimes cross 50,000 in 2020. 20% are Fraud cases
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 30, 2021
As expected, the pandemic-induced lockdowns resulted in increased internet usage which meant that the quantum of cyber-crimes has also increased. The number of registered cyber-crimes has increased more than five-fold since 2014 and crossed 50,000 for the first time in 2020. Cases of fraud accounted for more than 20% of these cases in 2020. The pendency of these cases at the police crossed 70% by the end of 2020.
COVID-19 induced lockdowns and precautionary movement restrictions forced people to stay indoors and switch to digital modes of communication for most tasks.  During this period, be it for attending classes, doctor consultations, office work, ordering food, shopping, financial transactions, and entertainment, people turned to the internet more than ever before. Such increase in digital interactions & transactions is also visible in the significant increase in the number of internet broadband subscribers in the county.
According to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), the total number of broadband subscribers (both wireless & wireline) in the country went up from 67.34 crores as of 31 January 2020 to 68.37 crore as of 31 May 2020. By 31 July 2021, post the two waves of the pandemic, the total number of broadband subscribers had crossed 80 crores.
This rapid growth of internet users and digital transactions has also resulted in the increase of cyber-crimes. In this story, we look at the trend in cyber-crimes over the last few years.
More than 50,000 cases of cyber-crime were registered for the first time in 2020
The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has been publishing the data related to cyber-crimes in its annual Crime in India (CII )report since 2002. The latest CII report for 2020 was released recently which puts the number of cases registered under cyber-crimes at more than 50,000. This is the first time that the number has crossed 50,000.
A total of 50,035 cases of registered cyber-crimes in 2020 is 11.8% more than the number in 2019.  In fact, the trend in the number of registered cyber-crimes shows that there has been a significant increase in the number over the last few years. Compared to 2010, the number of registered cyber-crimes has gone up nearly 38 times. Compared to 2014, the number has increased by more than five-fold. However, the actual number of cybercrimes could be much more since many such crimes do not get reported, especially low-amount financial frauds, cyberstalking, etc.  Only those cases registered with the police are reflected in the NCRB report.
As with the increase in the number of registered cases of cyber-crime, the rate of cyber-crime has also increased to reach 3.7 per lakh population in 2020, up from 3.3 in 2019. Prior to 2016, the rate of cyber-crime was negligible. In 2016, the crime rate was just one per lakh population.  That is, only one person out of one lakh people had reported a cyber-crime.
Comprehensive reporting of data related to cyber-crimes began in 2017
As compared to other crimes, ‘cyber-crimes’ is a relatively new head in the NCRB’s CII report. Hence, there have been multiple changes made to this section in the past few years. The data on crime-head-wise case cyber-crime cases were made available in the report starting 2017. Detailed cyber-crime statistics under the crime heads of cyber terrorism, defamation, fake profiles and those cyber-crimes targeting women and children covered under the Information and Technology Act of 2000 have been reported since 2017. In addition to this, data related to online frauds, circulation of fake news and others are also included in the report since 2017.
Cyber-crimes are registered under the IT Act 2000, IPC & SLL
The IT Act of 2000 stipulates the provisions regarding cybercrimes and the relevant penal provisions. Computer-related offenses, cyber terrorism, abetment/attempt to commit offences, publication/transmission of obscene or sexually explicit content, and tampering with computer source documents fall under the IT Act, 2000. However, not all cyber-crimes are covered under IT Act. Crimes related to forgery, cheating, fake news, data theft, defamation, etc. are registered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Offences under Special and Local Laws (SLL) include online gambling, online lotteries, among others.
Cases under IT Act constitute nearly 65% of total registered Cyber-crimes
On average, cases under the IT Act constitute 65% of the total registered cyber-crimes while those under IPC constitute the remaining around 35%. Between 2017 and 2020, the years for which comprehensive data is available, the total number of cyber-crimes under the IT Act, 2000 has more than doubled, from 13,635 in 2017 to 29,643 in 2020. During the same period, cyber-crimes under IPC have more than doubled, from 7,976 in 2017 to 20,201 in 2020. The cases under SLL are negligible and have increased from 185 in 2017 to 191 in 2020.
Computer-related offences account for three-fourth of the cases under the IT Act
The year-wise trend of cases registered under Crime-heads with at least 1000 cases between 2017 and 2020 is in the chart below. These 11 crime heads account for 98.5% of the cases registered under cyber-crimes in these four years. Computer-related offences contribute to the highest share of registered cyber crimes. Computer-related offences include ransomware-related offences, identity theft, violation of privacy, etc. In both 2017 and 2018, more than 10,000 cases were registered under this head and in the subsequent years, more than 20,000 cases were registered in each of the years 2019 and 2020. On average, about 75% of the cyber-crime cases registered under the IT Act were those of computer-related offenses. A total of 48.6% of the registered cyber-crimes in the last four years were computer-related offenses.
Contrary to the existing trend, the number of registered computer-related offenses decreased in 2020 to less than 22,000 cases which are 7% less than the number in 2019. On the other hand, the number of cases of fraud registered with the police more than tripled between 2018 and 2020.
The number of registered cases under the head ‘Publication/transmission of obscene/sexually explicit act in electronic form’ increased by more than three-fold between 2017 and 2020.  The number of registered cases of cheating has more than doubled.  Cases registered under ‘Cyberstalking and bullying of women and children’ witnessed an increase of 61%. Cases registered under forgery increased nearly 6 times though the number is small.
The number of cases registered for ‘fake news on social media’ increased by more than 3 times in four years and crossed 500 for the first time in 2020. Tampering computer source documents increased by 45% in the four years. Meanwhile, cases registered under cyber blackmail/threatening dropped slightly.
The remaining crime heads which contribute to less than 1.5% of the cases registered accounted for less than 100 registered cases each year including all the offences under SLL. Cases of data theft, and those under the ‘Trademarks Act’ and ‘Copy Rights Act’ have decreased whereas cases of cyber terrorism, online gambling, fake profiles, defamation, and counterfeiting have slightly increased.
The increase in the number of cases related to fraud, the transmission of obscene material, etc. could be a direct result of the lockdown & increased internet usage.
Poor disposal is resulting in increased pendency of cases
In the four years between 2017 and 2020, a total of 77,071 cases have been disposed of by the police while a total of 1,43,625 new cases were registered. The disposal was lowest in 2017 when less than 14,000 cases were disposed of. While the disposal rate has increased and close to 30,000 cases have been disposed of in 2020, the increase in the number of new cases has resulted in the increase of pendency. The disposal rate is less than the registration rate which means that the pendency of cases is only going up every year. As a result, the number of cases of cyber-crime pending at the end of a year has increased from 22,608 cases in 2017 to 74,142 cases in 2020, more than a three-fold increase in four years.
Pendency percentage is defined as the share of total cases that are pending investigation at the end of the year out of the total cases under investigation. The total number of cases under investigation includes cases carried forward from the previous year, new cases added in the current year and those cases which were re-opened for investigation. The pendency percentage has increased continuously in the four years- from 61.7% in 2017 to 65.1% in 2018 to 69% in 2019 and reached 71.3% in 2020.
The 2020 CII report indicates that the pendency was high for cases booked under ‘Identity theft’ under computer-related offences of the IT Act. Over 84% of the cases booked under ‘Identity Theft’ are pending. Under IPC, the pendency was as high as 90.9% for cases booked under ‘counterfeiting’ and ‘currency’, and 90.5% for ‘defamation/morphing’.
Timely disposal of Cyber-crimes is the need of the hour
As is evident from the data, the number of cyber-crimes has been increasing multi-fold over the years and this increasing trend is expected to continue as more people start using the internet. The pandemic-induced lockdown may also exacerbate the situation with people using the internet for several daily activities.
If the disposal rate does not increase and match the rate of registration of new crimes, the pendency is only going to go up. This may be possible only when the police force is equipped with the relevant skills and resources.

created: September 30, 2021


text:
Number of Stray Cattle decreased at the national level while it increased in certain states
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 7, 2022
Stray cattle are a major issue in some states with large cattle population. They cause inconvenience both in urban & rural areas. Data from the 2019 Livestock census indicates that while the number of stray cattle decreased at the national level, it increased in some key states.
Data related to livestock is significant as it helps in the planning, and formulation of programs for the sector. This becomes especially important that has a significant share of the population is still dependent on the rural economy. The Livestock Census in India is conducted by the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying and is the main source of the data related to this sector. The Census which essentially covers domesticated animals like livestock and poultry was first conducted in 1919 and has been conducted on a quinquennial basis since then. The findings of the census become the primary basis for multiple stakeholders such as agriculturists, traders, entrepreneurs, and the dairying industry.
20th Livestock Census Report was published in 2019
The latest Livestock Census report that was published in 2019 is the 20 such report. It was carried out in about 6.6 lakh villages and 89,000 urban wards across the country covering more than 27 crore households and non-households. The 19 livestock census was conducted in the year 2012.
The Livestock Census tracks the population of various species of domesticated animals such as cattle, buffalo, sheep, goat, mithun, yak, pig, horse, pony, mule, donkey, and poultry birds such as fowl, duck, emu, etc. In 2019, it was for the first time that the Census was conducted online using tablet computers. In the 2019 Census, the data released for Delhi is from 2012 as the census operations were not complete.
The stray cattle issue has been discussed in Parliament
In some states, legislation banning the slaughtering of cattle is known to have resulted in farmers abandoning their cattle in certain places, once the animal loses the ability to produce milk, and stops being useful.  Such stray cattle, in the absence of shelter, cause damage to crops in rural areas and cause traffic disruptions in urban areas. Data on the number of stray cattle across states is provided in the census report. The issue of stray cattle and whether their number has increased over the years because of legislation & other reasons has been raised in the Parliament multiple times.
Legislations vary across states
Legislations pertaining to the slaughtering of cattle are enacted in all states except Kerala, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Nagaland. Among UTs, Lakshadweep does not have any legislation. These legislations vary across states in terms of age & type of cattle that can be slaughtered, the requirement of a certificate, and the relevant penal provisions. For instance, the state of Rajasthan bans the slaughter and export of all Bovine which includes cow, calf, heifer, bull, or bullocks. Rigorous imprisonment between 1 to 2 years and a fine up to Rs. 10,000 has been prescribed for contravening the provisions of the law. Meanwhile, the state of Odisha prohibits the slaughter of cows, including heifers and calves. It also requires a fit-for-slaughter certificate if cattle are over 14 years of age or have become permanently unfit for breeding, or draught. The punishment is imprisonment up to a maximum of 2 years or a fine up to Rs 1,000 or both.
Stray cattle numbers have dropped by 5% in 2019 as compared to 2012
The stringent penal provision in the law and the resource required to maintain the unproductive cattle were expected to increase the number of stray cattle in the country. However, at the national level, the number of stray cattle in the country has reduced to 50.21 lakhs as per the 2019 census, from 52.88 lakhs as per the 2012 livestock census. In other words, the number of stray cattle reduced by about 5% in the seven years.
Of the 50.21 lakhs stray cattle in the country as of 2019, 25.4% were in Rajasthan (12.7 lakh), followed by 23.6% in Uttar Pradesh (11.84 lakhs). Along with Madhya Pradesh, the three states alone account for almost 66% of the stray cattle in the country. The states of Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Punjab, and Haryana have more than one lakh stray cattle each and together accounted for 23.9% of the stray cattle in the country, as per the 2019 livestock census. West Bengal, Bihar, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu with more than 50,000 stray cattle each accounted for more than 1% of the stray cattle each.
7 of the 10 states with the greatest number of stray cattle have recorded an increase
Compared to the 2012 livestock census data on stray cattle, 7 of the 10 states with the greatest number of stray cattle, viz; Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Punjab, and Haryana have recorded an increase in the number of stray cattle in 2019. Furthermore, the states of Goa, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Uttarakhand, where the slaughter of cows and their progeny including bulls & bullocks of all ages is banned have all witnessed an increase in stray cattle in the range of 9% to 65%. Meanwhile, in the states of Kerala, Meghalaya where there aren’t slaughter laws, there has been a drop in the number of stray cattle in 2019 as compared to 2012.
In order to get a clearer picture, we compare the percentage of stray cattle to total milch cattle in 2012 and 2019 as this would account for the actual change in the proportion of stray cattle. The absolute numbers of stray cattle would be misleading as states with a large cattle population are expected to have a large stray cattle number as well.
Stray Cattle is less than 1% in 19 states/UTs
In 2012, the share of stray cattle was less than 1% in 16 states/UTs which increased to 19 states/UTs by 2019. There were six states each in 2012 and 2019 where the share of stray cattle was between 1% to 3% and 3% to 5% each. The number of states/UTs with more than 10% share of stray cattle has dropped to two (Goa and Daman & Diu) in 2019 from four in 2012 (Odisha, Chandigarh, Goa, and Daman & Diu).
It must be noted that the 2012 data for Andhra Pradesh included that of Telangana before the bifurcation of the state in 2014.
The share of stray cattle has increased more than 1% in MP, Rajasthan, and Punjab
At the national level, the share of stray cattle compared to the total cattle population was 2.94% in 2012 which reduced to 2.57% in 2019. Among the states/UTs, Odisha recorded a decline of more than 16.5% while West Bengal and Bihar recorded a decline of 3.11% and 1.55%, in the share of stray cattle compared to the total cattle population between 2012 & 2019.
A total of 14 states/UTs registered a decline including Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Jharkhand. On the other hand, 20 states/UTs recorded an increase in the share of stray cattle. While the increase was marginal (<1%) in most states, Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Haryana, and Punjab recorded an increase of more than 1%.
What are governments doing about the issue?
Stray cattle cause inconvenience to the citizens, both in urban and rural areas. Apart from the inability to slaughter stray cattle due to stringent laws, the preference of farmers and breeders for certain breeds of cattle and neglect of other indigenous breeds is also a reason behind the abandoning of cattle.
At the national level, the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) is implementing schemes for providing grants to the recognized Animal Welfare Organizations including gaushalas for creating new shelters as well as for maintaining stray cattle. The AWBI is also providing assistance for feed &fodder, ambulance, and treatment of animals to the recognized Animal Welfare Organizations and gaushalas. Certain states are also implementing their own programs to protect stray cattle such as Madhya Pradesh where “Mukhya Mantri Gau Seva Yojna” is being implemented. The government of Chhattisgarh has been implementing the ‘Godhan Nyay Yojana’ under which new gaushalas would be built. The scheme also includes the procurement of cow dung from the owners.
Stray cattle are a major issue in many states. While the reduction of stray cattle at the national level is encouraging, an increase in the share of stray cattle in certain states is a cause for concern. It is important that states, where this is a major problem, start implementing dedicated programs to provide shelter for these animals along with incentives for cattle owners.
Featured Image: Number of Stray Cattle

created: January 7, 2022


text:
Data: The number of undertrial prisoners crosses 4 lakhs while their share among inmates touches 77%
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 20, 2022
The Prison Statistics India (PSI) report for 2021 was released recently. As per data provided in the report, the occupancy in Indian prisons crossed 130% by the end of 2021. Of the 5.54 lakh inmates lodged in prisons across India by end of 2021, 4.27 lakh were undertrials. Their share has increased to 77% by the end of 2021 from 66% by the end of 2012.
The annual Prison Statistics India (PSI) report published by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) provides comprehensive statistical information on various aspects of prison administration in India such as type of jails & occupancy, types of prisoners & demography, Indian & foreign prisoners, releases, transfers, movements, rehabilitation, and welfare of prisoners, etc. The report contains information on prisons, prisoners, and prison infrastructure in India and was first published in 1995. The report is based on the information produced by state prison departments. Recently, the NCRB released the report for 2021.
Prison occupancy crossed 130% in 2021, despite pandemic
As per the 2021 PSI report, there were 5.54 lakh inmates lodged in prisons across the country while the actual capacity of the prisons was only 4.26 lakh persons, as on 31 December 2021. The prison occupancy ratio touched 130.2%, the highest in the last 12 years. In other words, about 130 people were accommodated in a space meant to accommodate only 100 persons, highlighting the overcrowding in Indian prisons. This is despite the efforts to release the inmates languishing in prisons to ease the overcrowding in lieu of the COVID-19 pandemic as per court directions in 2020 and 2021.
The majority of the inmates in prisons are undertrials. An undertrial is a person who is currently on trial in a court of law. It should be noted that, unlike a convict who is found guilty by the court and sentenced to imprisonment by a court of law, an undertrial is an accused person kept in custody while the trial takes place in the court. Of the 5.54 lakh inmates lodged in the country’s prisons by the end of 2021, more than 4.27 lakh inmates were undertrials. Their share has only been increasing over the years. In the last decade, the share of undertrials increased from 66.2% by the end of 2012, to 77.1% by the end of 2021. In numerical terms, the number of undertrials in prisons was 2.55 lakhs by the end of 2012 (out of 3.73 lakh prison inmates) which has also continuously increased to 4.27 lakh by the end of 2021. That is, the number of undertrials has increased almost 1.7 times in the last decade.
1 in 3 undertrials in prison were confined for up to 3 months
The majority of the undertrials in prisons were those in confinement for up to 3 months. As the period of confinement increases, the share of undertrial prisoners and their numbers decreased.
Those who were confined for up to 3 months constituted more than one-third (34%) of the total undertrials in prisons in 2021, which is 1.46 lakh out of 4.27 lakh undertrial prisoners. Compared to 2012 (37.8%), the share of undertrials confined for up to 3 months has decreased. Those who were confined for 3 to 6 months, and 6 to 12 months constituted 20.3% and 16.5% respectively, in 2021, down from 22.1% and 17.6% respectively in 2012.
While there has been an overall reduction in the share of those undertrials who have been confined for up to a year, the share of those undertrials who have been confined for more than a year has increased over the years. The share of undertrials under confinement for more than a year has crossed 7.5% by the end of 2020 compared to less than 6% by the end of 2012. Likewise, the share of undertrials under confinement for 3 to 5 years has gone up from 3.4% by the end of 2012 to 5.6% by the end of 2021 and those under confinement for more than five years has gone increased from less than 1% to nearly 2.7% during the same period.
In terms of absolute numbers, the number of undertrials in confinement for 2 to 3 years has more than doubled since 2012, while that under confinement for 3 to 5 years has increased by more than 2.5 times. The number of undertrials in prisons for more than five years has also gone up by close to 6 times.
A disproportionately higher share of Muslims and Sikhs among undertrial prison inmates compared to their population share
The religion and caste-wise break up of undertrial prisoners is also provided in the PSI report. However, it should be noted that the data for 2016 was not published by the NCRB. Also, Maharashtra stopped providing demographic break up of undertrial prisoners since 2017 because of which the religion and caste-based distribution has been calculated excluding Maharashtra.
Hindus constituted more than 73% of the undertrials by the end of 2021, compared to less than 70% till 2015. Muslims comprised between 19 to 21% throughout the last ten years while Sikhs constituted 3.5 to 4.2%. The share of Christians has reduced marginally from 3.1% by end of 2018 to 2.34% by end of 2021. As per Census 2011, Hindus constituted 79.8%, Muslims made up 14.2%, Christians 2.34% and Sikhs 1.87% of the Indian population. Data from the PSI report indicates that there is a disproportionately higher share of Muslims and Sikhs among the undertrials in prisons, compared to their population share.
1 in 3 undertrials in prison is either SC or ST
In terms of caste breakup, the share of Scheduled Caste (SC) undertrials in prisons have always been between 20 to 23% while that of Scheduled Tribe (ST) undertrial prison inmates has been between 10 to 13% while their share of the population was less than 9% as per Census 2011. Since 2018, the share of SC undertrials has always been more than 22% though the share of the SC population in the country is about 16.6%. The share of Other Backward Class (OBC) undertrial inmates has increased over the years. It was below 32% until 2015 and since then increased gradually. In 2021, more than 38.2% of undertrial inmates belonged to OBC. Meanwhile, the share of undertrials from ‘other’ castes has dropped to less than 30% since 2018.
While distribution based on age, gender, and domicile hasn’t changed much, the share of undertrials with education beyond Class-X has increased
The share of illiterate persons and those who did not complete ‘Class-X’ among the undertrials in prisons has dropped from 30% and 43.3% by the end of 2012 to 25.3% and 39.4%, respectively by the end of 2021. Meanwhile, the share of those who studied beyond ‘Class-X’, graduates, and postgraduates has increased from 19.6%, 4.9%, and 0.8% respectively by the end of 2012 to 24.6%, 7.7%, and 1.78% respectively, by the end of 2021.
Since 2012, more than 95% of the undertrials were males and over 4% were females. It was only starting in 2019 that the category of transgenders was incorporated. Transgenders constituted less than 0.02% in 2020 and 2021.
On average, during the last decade, about 48% of the undertrials were aged 18 to 30 years old, and over 41% were aged between 30 and 50 years. About 10 to 11% of them were aged more than 50 years. Those aged between 16 to 18 years constituted a minuscule share (0.01%).
In almost all the years, close to 91% of the undertrials belonged to the same state in which they were imprisoned. Those belonging to other states contributed about 8%, and the rest were foreigners.
Faster trials & granting bails to eligible undertrials the only way to reduce overcrowding
As the data indicates, more undertrials go behind bars with every passing year. Not only is the number of undertrial inmates increasing, but their detention is for a longer duration. Many undertrials continue to languish in prisons for more than 1 or 2 years, which means the period of confinement has also increased. Also, there is a disproportionately higher share of Muslim and Sikh undertrial prison inmates as compared to their share in the population. Likewise, the share of undertrials belonging to SC and ST categories in prisons is also higher than their share in the general population.
The only way to reduce overcrowding in prisons is to reduce the number of undertrials. This is possible only through faster trials and grants of bails to eligible undertrials under Section 436A of CrPC. Further, despite the Supreme Court’s intervention in the past, there has not been much progress in the release of under-trials under the existing provisions.
Featured Image: Number of undertrial prisoners

created: September 20, 2022


text:
Data: The pass percentage in FMGE still hovers around 20%
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 5, 2022
The issue of medical education in India is back in the limelight thanks to the Russia-Ukraine crisis. Thousands of Indian students pursuing medical education in Ukraine are being evacuated by the government. While the number of medical colleges & seats has increased in the country, thousands still go abroad for cheaper medical education. Their pass percentage in the mandatory FMGE is still hovering around 20%.
Medical education forms a crucial segment of the health infrastructure of a nation. India is one of the nations with a large health infrastructure in the world. India ranks 10 in the Medical Tourism Index (MTI), 2020-21, out of the 46 destinations studied. It stands at 6 in the quality of facilities and the services in the MTI index.
The medical college system in India is also the largest in the world. The number of medical colleges catering to the demand requirements of medical education has also been growing. However, this expansion in medical education has proven to be inadequate, giving rise to wide inequities in accessing medical education. In addition to this, the growth of private medical colleges coupled with a lack of fee regulation had made medical education more expensive, making it unaffordable. Because of this, many students opt to pursue medical education in foreign universities, where the overall costs are low compared to India. In a July 2019 answer to the parliament, the Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs stated that the low admission costs and less demanding admission requirements are reasons behind students opting out for foreign nations like Ukraine, Russia, China, etc.
In this story, we look at the growth story of medical education in India and the changing patterns of migration towards foreign universities. Data is collated from the Annual Reports of the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Annual Reports of the National Board of Examinations, and questions raised in the parliament.
68% growth of medical colleges in India during the last decade
There is a significant growth in the number of medical colleges across India over the last decade. In 2010-11, the number of medical colleges, including private and government, was 334, which increased to 404 by 2014-15 and stands at 562 in 2020-21. This amounts to a 68% growth in the number of colleges in these 10 years. Accordingly, the number of medical seats at the ‘Under Graduate’ (UG) level increased from 41,500 in 2010-11 to 86,649 in 2020-21. Similarly, the number of seats at the ‘Post Graduate’ (PG) level increased from 21,100 in 2010-11 to 42,015 in 2020-21. This translates to an expansion in capacity up to 110% in UG seats and 100% in the PG seats.
Similarly, the ratio of seats per college has also improved from 124 to 154 during the same period. This shows that there is an expansion in capacity, both in terms of the number of colleges as well as the seats.
Around 60% of the seats are in just 8 states:
While there is a significant expansion in the medical colleges in India, this expansion has not been equitable. Out of the total 86,649 medical seats, nearly 51,262 seats are located just in 8 states, translating to around 60% of the total seats. The Empowered Action Group (EAG) States comprising of Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh account for only 27% of the total medical seats in India.
In terms of Zonal division as per the Socio-Economic Caste Census, the South zone, as well as the west zone, account for nearly 60% of the total medical colleges in India. One peculiar pattern about the south zone is the dominance of private medical colleges over government medical colleges.
‘Per Seat’ competition in NEET is rising
National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) had undergone significant changes from its inception. History dates to 1987, when the first All-India Pre-Medical Test (AIPMT) was conducted for admissions into government colleges in India. In 2010, the then Medical Council of India proposed NEET as a single examination for admission into all colleges under the ‘Regulations on Graduate Medical Examination, 2010’. Later in 2013, when MCI conducted the NEET for the first time, the Supreme Court squashed the exam. But in 2016, the exam took a re-entry and in 2017, the Supreme Court held that NEET as a single examination is mandatory.
For 2017 & 2018, the CBSE conducted the examination, while the National Testing agency was entrusted with this task from 2019. Data from the past five years clearly indicates that the number of applicants for the examination is rising, along with the competition per seat, which increased from 17.5 in 2017 to 21.7 in 2019. Thanks to capacity expansion during 2019-20, this ratio has slightly reduced.
There is a common misconception that students move to foreign universities to escape the competition in NEET, however, this is not true. As per the National Medical Commission, any student wishing to pursue education abroad on or after 2018, shall have to mandatorily qualify in NEET.
Increase in students appearing & passing Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (FMGE)
As per the answer given to the parliament, the number of Indian students going abroad for studies has been increasing. This figure was 3,71,506 in 2016 which grew to 5,88,931 in 2019. This data includes all students pursuing any kind of education abroad.
However, any student who did their medical education in foreign countries other than Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and who wishes to practice medicine in India are required to qualify for the FMGE exam. It is a statutory requirement under section 13(4A) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and is conducted by the National Board of Examination (NBE).
The data collated from NBE shows that the number of students attempting FMGE has been on rising for many countries while the pass percentage is below 20% on average. Particularly, for students who completed their medical education from countries like China, Russia, Ukraine, the pass percentage in FMGE has been slightly improving over the last few years. However, the pass percentage is still only around 20% on average.
What are some of the important issues concerning Medical Education?
Fee regulation: One of the primary challenges of medical education is affordability. The cost for medical examination in private institutions in India can be anywhere between Rs. 50 lakhs and a few crores, while the same would be around Rs. 30 lakhs from foreign universities. The primary quantum of such hefty fees is the capitation fee, which is acknowledged by several committees.
The following is an excerpt from the Yashpal committee report that was set up to advise on ‘Renovation and Rejuvenation of Higher Education’ in 2008.
Accordingly, the government tried to bring a legislation, ‘The Prohibition of Unfair Practices in Technical Educational Institutions, Medical Educational Institutions and Universities Bill, 2010’ to protect the interests of the students admitted. The legislation sought to prohibit the capitation fee. But with the dissolution of the government in 2014, this bill got lapsed.
The NITI Aayog preliminary committee on Reform of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, also talks about the fee regulation. It calls for achieving a balance between promoting institution founders’ interests as well as students’ interests. Accordingly, it recommended that the National Medical Commission (NMC) should be empowered to regulate fees for seats not exceeding 40% of the capacity.
However, the NMC act 2019 act empowers the NMC to determine the fees in 50% of the seats in private and deemed to be universities.
Relaxation of Minimum Standards Requirements (MSR): It takes around Rs. 300-400 crores to establish a new medical college and another  Rs. 50 crores as the operating recurring cost annually, as per estimates of experts.  The cost includes the land requirement criteria, the space requirements for different functional areas and the mandatory clause to run a hospital attached to the medical college. As a result, private participation is very low. To encourage more participation, the government has undertaken the rationalization of the MSR in terms of bed, faculty & land requirements.
Featured Image: Pass percentage in FMGE


text:
Data: The Second wave of COVID-19 in Europe & USA is significantly less fatal than the first
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
November 27, 2020
Most of the large European countries & the USA are currently experiencing a second wave of COVID-19. While the number of cases has increased significantly, the number of deaths hasn’t increased at the same rate. In fact, the second wave of COVID-19 has been significantly less fatal in all these countries than the first wave.
In the earlier story, we highlighted the prevalence of second wave of COVID-19 in few of the European countries & USA. While there has been an increase in the number of daily cases during the second wave when compared to that of the first wave, the Case Positivity Rate i.e number of cases being detected in respect to the tests being done is also higher than what was observed during the peak of the first wave.
While the case load & positivity rate indicate a wider spread of COVID-19 during the second wave, it does not necessarily mean it is more severe.  During the first wave of COVID-19 witnessed early this year in these countries, substantial progress has been made regarding the understanding of COVID-19 and its treatment.
The first wave in many of these European countries was marked by high number of deaths. In this story, we look at the fatality data (number of deaths & fatality rate) during the second wave to better understand the severity of this second wave.
Number of Daily deaths less than during the first wave in Europe
As observed in the earlier story, the second wave of COVID-19 in the large European countries began around late August and gradually peaked during October & Novemebr’2020. In most of these countries, the number of daily cases has seen a decline over the last week to 10 days. Based on this information, it can ascertained that these countries in Europe have experienced peak phases of both the waves of COVID-19 infection, unless there is a reversal of trend in near future.
Spain & Italy were among the countries which reported a higher number of deaths during the first wave. An older population and not much understanding of COVID-19 was generally considered the reason for higher number of deaths. During the peak of the first phase, Italy has averaged around 700 daily deaths while Spain averaged around 800 deaths.
We have considered the data provided on Our World in Data, and have normalized the daily deaths as a 10-day average to account for inconsistencies due to any spikes on particular dates and data corrections by the authorities.
Italy is currently reporting around 600 daily deaths on an average and has recently started to report a fall in the number of daily COVID-19 related deaths. Comparatively, Spain has performed better during the second wave of the infection, with the peak average daily deaths being around 400.
France & UK which reported upwards of a thousand daily deaths during the peak phase of the first wave have managed to keep the number of daily deaths low during the second phase. Meanwhile, Germany had reported lower number of deaths even during the first phase and the numbers remain more or less the same for the second wave as well.
On the other hand, Russia, has seen an increase in the number of daily deaths which is a continuation of the trend observed over the past few months.
CFR during second wave much lower than during the first wave
It has to be noted that the absolute number of deaths depends on multiple factors such as case load, population etc. Countries with a higher population and high case load may report a higher number of deaths. Hence to understand the severity of the disease spread, ‘Case Fatality Rate’ (CFR) is a better indicator. CFR refers to the number of deaths per number of COVID-19 cases. In other words, it is number of deaths for every 100 reported cases.
The CFR also helps us analyse any improvements that might have been achieved over a period of time in treating COVID-19 enabling the recovery of those infected with the virus.  Since the time frame of death due to COVID-19 varies, cumulative Case Fatality Rate (CFR) offers a better picture than daily numbers.
During the first phase of COVID-19 in Spain, CFR was around 9-10%. A subsequent fall in the number of cases but not deaths contributed towards a higher CFR in ensuing months with CFR for Spain peaking during June & July 2020 with around 11%. The emergence of second wave of COVID-19 has seen a near 10-fold increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. However, as highlighted earlier, the number of deaths during this second wave remained lower there by contributing to a lower CFR. A consistent decline in CFR is observed since the emergence of second wave.
Similar trend with slight variance in time period is observed in France, Italy & UK also. Because of the lower number of death cases in Germany all through, the decline is not as prominent, but the CFR has been comparatively lower during the second wave compared to the first wave.
In the case of Russia, the increase in the number of deaths is reflected in an increased CFR.
CFR in the USA has also decreased to about 2% now
During the first phase of COVID-19 in USA, the highest number of daily deaths in the world were recorded with upwards of 2,500 daily deaths on average at the peak. Over a period of time, the numbers reduced with around 800-1000 deaths being reported over a prolonged period of time. In the earlier story, we had observed that since late October 2020, there has been an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases. While there has also been an increase in the number of deaths, it is still lower than the numbers reported during April 2020.
In the meantime, the CFR is on a constant decline over the past few months to reach just around 2%, from a peak of about 6% in early May.  However, unlike most of the European countries being discussed in this story, USA has not yet tided over the second wave , with greater numbers being reported even now.
The peak of first phase in India was around the time Europe was getting into a second wave
When compared to Europe and most of the other countries in the world including Asia, the COVID-19 infection spread later in India. It was only around early April 2020 that India  started reporting average daily number of COVID-19 cases in the hundreds. By the end of April 2020, more than thousand daily cases were being reported. By the end of May 2020, the daily cases went up to 8-10 thousand, which was nearly the same numbers as reported by Italy, Spain, UK and other countries at the peak of their first wave.
However, these numbers are much lower than India’s peak, which it achieved in mid-September with around 90 thousand daily cases. Even USA, the country with the highest number of COVID-19 cases has not reported such numbers during the first wave with its maximum being around 75-80 thousand daily cases.
USA was able to breach India’s daily numbers only during its second wave. India’s daily case numbers started tapering off at the beginning of October 2020. By this time, USA was beyond its its first wave’s peak and most of the aforementioned European countries started to record higher number of cases as part of their second wave.
Unlike the European countries where in the peak was achieved relatively quickly with two odd months both during the first & second wave, it took a long time for India to reach its peak. The time period it took India to reach its peak is even longer compared to the USA.
India’s CFR down to 1.46%
India’s peak in terms of daily deaths coincides with the period when the country reported the highest number of COVID-19 cases. During most of September, India reported around 1000-1200 daily deaths on average. The numbers have since fallen to around 450-550 daily deaths on average over the last month or so.
A significant aspect of this is that the fall in cases & deaths resulted in a fall in CFR. India’s CFR is currently 1.46%, down from the peak of around 3.4% in Mid-May. This trend of higher cases & deaths with a lower CFR is also observed during second wave in European countries & USA.
What could this mean for India?
Statistically, the increase in the number of reported cases could be a factor in lower CFR in European countries during second wave, which was not the case during the first phase. Furthermore, the timing of EU second wave coinciding with India’s peak of first phase lends more similarity in the trends. Unlike EU’s first wave, the delayed first wave in India provided an opportunity to be more aware of COVID-19 and take necessary actions, which could have contributed to a lower CFR. It could also be a case of less-fatal strain of COVID-19 virus, though there is little evidence of the same. The numbers in India are currently on a decline, after the peak in September. Although the first half of November did give rise to apprehensions about a possible of second wave on account of the festive season & opening up, the recent numbers do not show any dramatic increase.
More than Europe, USA provides a more relatable picture to India’s trajectory. Going by the trend in USA, India could witness a possible second wave in the coming two months.  Based on the trend of second waves across the world, while the numbers could rise the infection could be less fatal.
Another aspect which India could learn from the US experience is that during the second wave, the new cases are being reported in those states which managed to elude the first wave. India has been fortunate to an extent that more populous and lesser developed states did not report higher COVID-19 cases during the first wave. Spread of infection in these states could prove to be more fatal than our current experience with COVID-19. With improved understanding and preparedness, India could well avoid a second wave provided there is better planning, preparedness & public support.
However, it is still early to write off a second wave in India. We are in peak winter season following the festivities and December & January could be crucial and would determine India’s future trajectory.
Featured Image: Second wave of COVID-19

created: November 27, 2020


text:
The share of Elderly population is set to increase to 13.1% in 2031
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
August 9, 2021
The government recently released a ‘Elderly in India- 2021’ report that provides demographic and other forms of data related to the elderly. The data indicates that the share of ‘elderly’ in the overall population is estimated to reach 13.1% in 2031, up from 8.6% in 2011 and 5.6 in 1961. However, there are wide variations among states.
In an earlier story, we analysed some key trends relating to the elderly population in the country, based on the data from the 75 Round of NSS report released by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MoSPI). It was evident from this report that more elderly couples were staying alone than earlier, around 1/3 of the elderly was financially independent and a higher dependence on children & grandchildren among the dependent.
Recently, MOSPI published the ‘Elderly in India- 2021’  report. This is the Fifth Edition of the report, which was first brought out by MoSPI in 2000. The data collected & furnished by MoSPI regarding the elderly in the country is key for their inclusion in development planning. This is in line with the pledge of the 2030 Agenda of Sustainable Development – ‘No One To Be Left Behind’.
In this story, we look at a few of the important trends regarding the elderly population in the country as provided by this report, more specifically on the Population statistics. Individuals who are 60 years and above are considered elderly population as per the report.
Increase in share of the elderly population over the decades with the increase in life expectancy
Data indicates that there has been a steady increase in the share of the elderly population since 1961.  The report observes that this is mainly due to the fall in death rates that was made possible through various health interventions resulting in increased life expectancy.
In 1961, the elderly population constituted around 5.6% of the total population of India. Over the ensuing decades, there was a steady increase with the elderly population constituting 8.6% of the total population as per the 2011 census. As per census projections, the elderly population is estimated to be 10.1% in 2021 and their share would reach 13.1% of the total population by 2031.
The trend is similar for both male & female populations. However, the growth rate in the share of elderly females among the total female population is higher than that of elderly males among the total male population.
As per the 1961 census, elderly females constituted 5.8% of the total female population. This increased to 9% by 2011 and is projected to increase to 10.7% in 2021 and to 14% in 2031. In the case of males, elderly males constituted 5.5% of the total male population in 1961. This increased to 8.2% in 2011 and is projected to be 9.6% as per the 2021 census and 12.3% by 2031.
Along with the share of the elderly population (> 60 years), the share of the population in the 15-59 age group has also increased. The share of the population in this age group was 56.1% during the 1961 census and increased to 60.3% in 2011 and is projected to increase to 64.4% by the 2021 census. The increase in the share of the population for these two age groups comes at the cost of the younger population in the 0-14 years age. Their share fell from 38.4% in 1961 to 30.8% in 2011 and is projected to further fall to 25.5% in 2021. The decreasing fertility rates and birth rates could be reasons for the fall in their share.
The decadal growth rate of the elderly population is nearly five times that of the general population growth rate
Population data from the recent report indicates an increasing proportion of the elderly population, aided by people living longer coupled with falling birth rates. These contrasting trends become more conspicuous when the decadal growth rate is considered.
During the decade of 1951-61, the overall population growth rate of India was 21.6%, while the growth rate specific to the elderly population was 23.9%. In the ensuing decades, the overall population growth rate increased to 24.8% during 1961-71 followed by 24.7% during 1971-81. Since then, the decadal growth rate has continuously decreased. For 2001-2011, the decadal growth rate of the overall population of India is 17.7%, which is expected to further fall to 12.4% for 2011-21.
The case of elderly population growth rate followed an almost opposite trend from 2001. After an increase in the growth rate for 1961-71 at 33.7%, the growth of the elderly population fell successively till the 1991-2001 decade. However, the trend reversed starting from 2001. During 2001-2011, the growth rate of the elderly population was 35.5%. Projections for 2011-21 show a slight increase at 35.8 % and the 2021-31 projection estimate the growth in the elderly population to be 40.5%. In other words, for the 2021-31 period, the growth rate of the elderly population is estimated to be around 5 times the growth rate of the total population.
Better health infrastructure & interventions since the turn of the century leading to longer life period could be some of the major reasons for this trend. This is coupled with falling birth rates and hence a greater share of the population above 14 years. The trends also point to early signs of an aging population.
Fall in the death rates across age categories of the elderly population
Across the different age groups of the elderly population, data indicates a general fall in death rates over the last 10 years or so. As per the information provided in the Elderly in India 2021 report, there were around 22.5 deaths per 1000 population among the 60-64 years age category in 2008, which fell to 18.4 in 2013. Although there was a slight increase in 2018, it was still lower than in 2008. The same is the case with the 65-69 age group.
In the higher age groups, i.e., 70-74, 75-79, 80-84 & 85 + years, the general trend has been of a decline. It must be noted that the death rate is progressively higher as age increases. But a comparison over the years indicates a general declining trend from 2008 to 2018. Even in the case of the 85 + years age group, although there was an increase in death rate to 212.7 per 1000 in 2013, it fell to 174.7 in 2018.
Southern States have a greater increase in the proportion of the elderly population compared to states like U.P. & Bihar
Across the states, there is an increase in the share of the elderly population among the respective state population, when the figures from 2001 are compared with the projected numbers for 2021. However, larger disparities exist not only in the proportion of the elderly population among the overall population but also in the growth of this population over this 20-year period.
The trends show a clear difference between the states. As highlighted earlier, the availability of better health interventions, economic well-being, etc. are regarded as the main reasons for the increase in the elderly population. This seems to reflect in the case of southern states, which are considered more economically developed compared to the northern and central states.
U.P, Bihar, M.P, and other states with a lower proportion of the elderly population are also among the states with poor health infrastructure. Better population control & family planning measures in the southern states in the last 3-4 decades also seem to have contributed to these numbers.
Age demographics help in making the right policy decisions aimed at the well-being of elderly
A higher life expectancy as seen in the increasing proportion of the elderly population in some ways reflects the general health status of the population. Data relating to Life -expectancy after 60 years, also shows that there is an increase in the number of years of life expectancy beyond this age. All these factors confirm the improvement in health infrastructure & advances in healthcare over the last few decades.
However, as observed, this is not uniform across the country. Some of the economically well-off states have a higher proportion of the elderly population. While this reflects a better healthcare environment for the elderly, these states are more vulnerable to pandemics like COVID-19 because of a higher proportion of the elderly who are among the most vulnerable groups.
The dichotomy of a higher share of the elderly population due to better standards of living and the greater chance of exposure to health risks was highlighted in a 2020 report by the RBI. The states with higher COVID-19 positive cases during the first wave were the more developed ones and the ones with a higher proportion of the elderly population.
The detailed data on the elderly demographics can help the governments to plan effectively for the wellbeing of the elderly population, in terms of welfare measures, setting up support systems, etc.
However, the population data of the elderly tell us only a part of the story. The standard of living of the elderly population (economic, health & social status) is important to ascertain their overall well-being. We will analyse the data on these aspects in the next story.
Featured Image: Elderly in India- 2021 Report

created: August 9, 2021


text:
Data: There Are 1.17 Lakh Single-Teacher Schools Across The Country in 2021-22
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 3, 2023
Data from a parliament response indicates that there are more than 1.17 lakh single-teacher schools across the country, which is around 9% of the total number of the schools in India. Rationalization of schools in India should have resulted in the reduction of number of single-teacher schools. The same cannot be analysed as data on such schools is not available for all the years.
Access to formal education was one of the major challenges identified in the early 2000s in India. Consequently, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan (SSA) was launched in 2001, with the aim to universalize elementary education in India. As universal enrolment was the primary motto under SSA, complementing actions such as infrastructure for universal schooling were undertaken, where schools were provisioned in all habitations within walking distance.
Accordingly, there was a large expansion in the schooling facilities, with SSA providing for more than 2 lakh primary and 1.5 lakh upper primary schools by 2015-16. Despite such an expansion, school enrolment figures remained stagnant, partly due to the proliferation of private schools and the resource deprivation of government schools. Thus, the government was staring at twin problems – lower enrolment resulting from underutilization and a burden on resources in maintaining the existing infrastructure. Amidst all these, the Right to Education (RTE) act, 2009 was enacted that provided for certain norms and standards including the pupil-teacher ratio, and teacher qualifications among other things.
To strike a balance between these objectives, in the mid-2010s, the Government of India embarked on an ambitious mission to improve the learning outcomes and entail the best possible utilization of available resources by undertaking school mergers and consolidation of schools, often called ‘rationalization of schools.’ The primary stated objective behind such a mission was to enhance the access of all children to fully functional neighbourhood schools and to consolidate the resources for the best interest of the children. School rationalization is touted to be a trade-off between the redistribution of infrastructure and improving learning outcomes.
In today’s story, we look at some of the statistics related to school education that are directly impacted by school rationalization.
Steady decline in the number of government schools
Even before the rationalization at a national level began, many states such as Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Goa, and multiple others have initiated school mergers and consolidation of schools. As a result, the number of government schools declined consistently from 2014-15 to 2017-18. However, after embarking on rationalization in 2017, this decline has become steeper. While the pandemic put temporary breaks on the school closures in 2020-21, the process picked up again in 2021-22. On the other hand, private schools witnessed considerable growth, excepting 2021-22, where there were school closures due to the financial stress induced by COVID-19.
One-teacher schools in India still significantly high
The Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE) is a comprehensive database of statistics on the Indian educational system, which has been redesigned as UDISE+. The original UDISE programme began in 2012–13, and the redesigned UDISE+ programme started in 2018–19. The latest publication of UDISE+ is the 2021-22 report.
In the earlier versions of UDISE, the data regarding the single-teacher school is mentioned while the redesigned version of UDISE+ does not have data regarding the status of single-teacher schools. Data from 2014-15 to 2017-18 indicates that there is a fall in the number of single-teacher schools in India from 1,19,303 in 2014-15 to 1,05,102 in 2017-18. However, the same data is not available for the years 2018-19 to 2021-22.
Alternatively, as a response to a parliamentary question on the consolidation of schools, the Ministry of Education replied that in 2021-22, around 1,17,285 one-teacher schools are reported in India. The type of management of these schools is also not specified.
While the earlier version of UDISE had data by school category and for rural and urban areas, the newer version UDISE+ does not have any such data. Also, since the data pertains to two different versions, it might not be prudent to do a one-on-one comparison as there could be variances in the data capturing. However, it still gives a fair estimate of the single-teacher schools in India.
Madhya Pradesh tops with the highest number of one-teacher schools
If one looks at data of single-teacher schools state-wise, it is evident that Madhya Pradesh has the highest number of one-teacher schools in India with 16,630 schools in 2021-22, followed by Andhra Pradesh with 12,386 schools, and Rajasthan with 10,878 schools. These higher numbers are despite the fact that these states have initiated rationalization of schools much before the national level rationalization began. Andhra Pradesh constituted a Working Group to study and report on the modalities for ‘Resource Redistribution Rationalization (RR-R)’ of Schools in the State in 2014-15, while Rajasthan came up with the idea to integrate schools and establish Model Schools in 2013-14.
Did school consolidation achieve its objective?
One of the primary objectives of school mergers and consolidation was to improve enrolment figures by effective utilization of existing resources. However, if we look at the enrolment figures of government schools, it had consistently declined from 2014-15 to 2019-20. Though rationalization was taken up in 2017, it had no effect on the enrolment figures. However, in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent financial hardships it caused, there is a slight improvement in the enrolment figures in government institutions. A direct causal relationship between school rationalization and improvement in enrolment figures cannot be established as COVID-19 could be an outlier.
Even if we consider learning outcomes, the National Achievement Survey (NAS) of 2021 showed a decline in learning outcomes when compared to the previous NAS conducted in 2017. This was highlighted earlier by Factly in this story.
Need for more comprehensive data in UDISE+
The redefined version of the UDISE has some limitations. Some crucial data such as data on single-teacher schools, and rural and urban categorization wherever necessary is not presented. In addition, the implementation of the New Education Policy (NEP) 2020 also means the addition of new indicators or modifications to the existing indicators, which the latest UDISE+ report is silent about. It is high time that UDISE+ undertakes a comprehensive review of its data-capturing formats and makes suitable modifications to ensure adequate data is captured and reported.
Featured Image: Single-Teacher Schools