text:
Data: Global Crude Steel Production Increased 10-fold Compared to 1950, with China Producing More Than 50% - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 17, 2023
The steel sector operates on a worldwide scale, with significant global trade in raw materials like iron ore and scrap, as well as steel products. Over the span of seventy years, starting from 1950, worldwide production has multiplied tenfold, increasing from 189 million metric tons to a staggering 1,885 million metric tons by 2022. There is a clear dichotomy in the world crude steel production, with China contributing more than half (54%), followed by a very distant India at merely 6.6%, as of 2022.
Metals, unassuming treasures hidden beneath the earth, have been the mighty engines of industrialization. Among these metallic heroes, steel reigns supreme. This metal is no ordinary alloy; it is a linchpin, a universal connection that binds the three pillars of industry: agriculture, manufacturing, and services.
From the plough that tills the soil to the skyscrapers that touch the sky, steel is the thread that weaves through the fabric of our progress. When the fires of industry burn hot and steel flows abundantly, economies surge forward. When those fires dim, it’s a stark reminder that progress has momentarily paused. The production and consumption of steel are not just numbers on a balance sheet; they are the pulse of a nation’s economic well-being.
In this article, we look at global and India’s steel industry trends showcasing its progress and the challenges it faces.
World Crude steel production grew tenfold in past seven decades.
The steel sector operates on a worldwide scale, with significant global trade in raw materials like iron ore and scrap, as well as steel products. Globally, there has been a remarkable surge in crude steel production. Over the span of seventy years, starting from 1950, worldwide production has multiplied tenfold, increasing from 189 million metric tons to a staggering 1,885 million metric tons by 2022. This growth is most likely due to an unprecedented rise in demand for steel owing to rapid urbanization.
The average growth rate per annum between 1950-55 stood at 7.4%, the highest in all these seven decades. It is followed by 6.2% between 2000-05. In the twentieth century, the average growth rates per annum stood between 2005-10 stood at 4.6%, 2010-15 at 2.5%, and 2015-20 at 3% respectively. The global steel production experienced a slump due to COVID-19, with the growth rate per annum between 2020-22 being merely 0.2%.
India becomes second largest crude steel producer in the world.
The world geography of crude steel production is undergoing restructuring in response to international and national conditions. There is a clear dichotomy in the world crude steel production, with China contributing more than half (54%), followed by a very distant India at merely 6.6%, as of 2022. This inequitable domination by China determines the future growth of the global steel industry.
The share of China in 2000 was just at nearly 15%, followed by Japan at 12.5% and the United States at 12% respectively.  India’s share stood at 3% during the same period. Within a span of two decades, as of 2022, China’s contribution stood at 54%, followed by India, Japan, and the United States at 6.7%, 4.7%, and 4.3% respectively. India’s crude steel production surpassed Japan for the first time in 2016, making it the second largest in the world. From 2018, India steadily remained as the second largest crude steel producer.
Widening gap in Per Capita Steel Usage in India and the world
Though India is the second largest producer of crude steel in the world, the per capita consumption of steel in India is very low. In 2001, the per capita consumption of steel in India was 26.8 Kg, while it was 133.4 Kg for the world. Two decades later, India’s per capita consumption stands at 81.1 Kg while the world’s per capita consumption is 221.8 Kg. In Indian rural areas, the per capita consumption is merely 10 Kg.
It is also observed that India has not paced proportionately with the world in per capita steel consumption. The gap between the Indian and the world’s per capita steel consumption is only widening. In the trajectory of developed nations, three distinct phases emerge in terms of steel consumption- starting with a low base of steel consumption, followed by exponential growth and thereafter stabilizing at a lower level once the industry matures. It is also expected that India follows this trajectory, and hence the vision of the New National Steel Policy of 2017, aiming to increase the per capita consumption of steel to 160 kgs by 2030-31.
Indian exports of finished steel at all-time high in last two decades
The finished steel production in India stood at 114 MT while the consumption stood at 106 MT in 2021-22. This is the second-highest finished steel production after 2017-18 in the last two decades. Similarly, Indian finished steel consumption crossed the 100-million-ton mark for the second time in 2021-22 after 2019-20. In terms of exports and imports, the finished steel exports crossed the 10-million-ton mark consecutively for 2020-21 and 2021-22, while the imports remained lower than the 2006-07 levels. The gap in exports and imports for 2020-21 and 2021-22 project a positive outlook for the Indian steel industry, with India becoming a net exporter of finished steel.
Indian Steel Industry- Opportunities and Challenges for future
The low per capita usage of steel in India demonstrates a strong growth potential for the Indian steel industry. Key demand drivers for steel consumption include building, construction, and infrastructure, which account for almost two-thirds of the steel demand. As per the Construction Industry Development Council, almost 30% of the steel demand is in real estate, and India is among the countries that have less than 10% of the market share of steel-framed construction, which is as high as 80% in a few industrialized countries. It shows the growth potential of the steel Industry in India. As per the National Steel Policy 2017, in India, steel has an output multiplier effect of nearly 1.4X on GDP and an employment multiplier factor of 6.8X. It is imperative that adequate support systems be developed to keep the steel industry going.
While the future looks bright, it is laced with challenges. Global steel markets are primarily demand and supply driven, and are dependent on a multitude of factors including country structures, policy regimes, and trade barriers among others. In addition to this, the Steel industry is one of the largest contributors to carbon emissions, and it remains an energy-intensive activity. As per the World Steel Association Sustainability report 2022, the carbon dioxide emissions intensity (tonnes CO2/ton crude steel) increased from 1.8 in 2007 to 1.91 in 2021. With global commitments to environmental protection, countries like India which have tremendous growth potential, need to quickly adapt to the latest technologies in greener steel production.

created: October 17, 2023


text:
Global deaths due to TB increase by around 7% while diagnosis of new cases reduces on account of the pandemic
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
October 25, 2021
Disruption to diagnostic & treatment services across the globe meant that the number of deaths due to TB increased for the first time in 2020. On the other hand, the diagnosis of new cases has been reduced highlighting the impact of the pandemic on diagnostic & treatment services. The trend in India was also similar.
Tuberculosis (TB) is a potentially serious infectious disease caused by bacteria (Mycobacterium tuberculosis) that mainly affects the lungs. Though a quarter of the world’s population is infected with tuberculosis bacteria, only a small proportion of those infected become sick with TB. Those with weakened immune systems such as people living with HIV, malnutrition or diabetes, or people who use tobacco, consume alcohol, etc. are at a higher risk of falling ill from TB.
Though the disease is curable and preventable, millions fall ill globally every year across countries and age groups. Over the years, multiple initiatives have been taken at the global level to tackle the disease. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the reversal of decades of progress in TB elimination. For the first time in over a decade, the number of deaths due to TB has increased due to reduced access to TB diagnosis and treatment in the face of the pandemic.
Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the Global Tuberculosis Report 2021 which is an annual publication being published since 1997. The report provides a comprehensive and up-to-date assessment of the TB epidemic and is based primarily on data gathered by WHO in annual rounds of data collection. In 2021, data reported by 197 countries and territories which account for more than 99% of the world’s population and TB cases have been considered.
The global incidence of TB cases per lakh population continues to decline
It is estimated that the global incidence of TB cases per lakh population has dropped to 127, the lowest since the year 2000. The was as high as 174 cases per lakh population at the beginning of the millennium and since then, there has been a gradual drop in the incidence of TB over the years. An estimated 9.9 million people fell ill with TB in 2020.
Fewer new cases of TB diagnosed in 2020 compared to 2019
The number of new cases of TB diagnosed annually was 6.4 million cases in 2016 which increased to 7.1 million in 2019. However, in 2020, the number dropped to 5.8 million cases, a drop of 18% compared to 2019. A similar pattern, an increase in new cases up to 2019 and a subsequent sharp drop in cases in 2020 has been observed in 5 out of 6 WHO regions. About 1.3 million fewer cases of TB were detected in 2020 compared to 2019 and about 84% of this global drop in new cases was reported from the regions of South-East Asia and the Western Pacific. India (41%), Indonesia (14%), the Philippines (12%), China (8%) and 12 other countries accounted for 93% of the total global drop of 1.3 million in 2020.
This reduction is largely due to the pandemic which resulted in reduced access to disease diagnosis, treatment, and spending. While healthcare systems were put to test during this period, people were also hesitant to go to hospitals due to lockdowns and movement restrictions, risks of catching an infection, and stigma associated with similarities in the symptoms related to TB and COVID-19. Furthermore, an 8.7% decline in spending on TB between 2019 and 2020 (from US$ 5.8 billion to US$ 5.3 billion) has been reported. The 2020 spending on TB back to the 2016 level of funding.
Though the number of new cases of TB has reduced, the number of deaths due to the disease has increased in 2020. A total of 1.5 million people died from TB in 2020 (including 2.14 lakh people with HIV). Globally, TB is the 13 leading cause of death and the second leading infectious killer after COVID-19. Compared to the over 1.4 million deaths (including 2.09 lakh people with HIV) in 2019, the number of deaths has increased in 2020. This is for the first time since 2005 that the total number of deaths due to TB has increased year on year. The same trend has been reflected in the global TB mortality per lakh population. The years of progress made in reducing TB deaths globally has suffered a setback by the pandemic. In fact, the increase in deaths confirms that the reduction in the diagnosis of new cases is due to the pandemic and not due to the incidence of disease.
The trend in India is similar to the Global trend
Just like the global trend, the incidence of TB cases in India has reduced in the last two decades. In the year 2000, the incidence was as high as 289 cases per lakh population which have now reduced to 188 cases per lakh population. This is the lowest incidence since the year 2000.
COVID-19 has affected TB diagnosis and treatment in India
Similar to the global trend, the number of new cases of TB reported in India in 2020 is less than in 2019. The number of new cases of TB dropped from 2.64 million in 2019 to 2.57 million in 2020, a reduction of 3%. In other words, India reported about 70,000 fewer cases in 2020 compared to 2019 which may be attributed to the effect of the pandemic.
The number of deaths due to TB, including those with HIV, has increased from around 0.45 million persons in 2019 to 0.5 million persons in 2020, an increase of 10%. This trend is on par with the global trend, indicating that India, just like most other countries, has been hit significantly by COVID-19 in providing diagnosis, treatment, and spending.
Country-specific models suggest that in the 16 top countries contributing to a higher number of TB cases including India, greater negative impacts in terms of deaths and cases are expected in 2021. The greatest impact on TB deaths is expected in 2021 and on TB incidence is forecast for 2022.
Progress towards TB milestones and targets has been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic
The ‘End TB’ Strategy of WHO serves as a blueprint for countries to reduce TB incidence by 80%, TB deaths by 90%, and to eliminate catastrophic costs for TB-affected households, by 2030. The Strategy is not a ‘one size fits all’ approach and its success depends on adaptation for diverse country settings.
The ‘End TB’ Strategy’s targets for reduction in TB disease burden by 2020 were a 35% reduction in the number of TB deaths and a 20% reduction in the TB incidence rate, compared to the 2015 levels. These milestones were not achieved globally or in most WHO regions and countries. The reduction in the number of TB deaths between 2015 and 2020 was only 9.2% globally, a quarter of the milestone. The progress up to 2019 (14% reduction from 2015 to 2019) and a 41% reduction in TB deaths from 2000 to 2019 in was disrupted by the pandemic.
In India, the government stated that under the National TB Elimination Programme (NTEP), multiple steps have been taken to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on TB Services. Among the steps listed by the government are provision for free TB drugs for an extended duration and door-step delivery, provision of guidance on ensuring the functionality of TB diagnostic labs, issuance of multiple advisories to States and districts to ensure uninterrupted services during COVID-19, and guidance to states/UTs for Bi-directional TB-COVID screening and screening of TB among ILI/SARI cases.
WHO calls for urgent action to mitigate and reverse the impact of COVID-19
The WHO has called for urgent action to mitigate and reverse the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on TB. The immediate priority is to restore access to and provision of essential TB services such that levels of TB case detection and treatment are brought back to 2019 levels. Ending the TB epidemic by 2030 is also among the health targets of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While this target looks like a long shot at this moment, restoring normalcy in diagnostic & treatment services would be the first step in that journey.
Featured Image: Global Deaths due to TB

source: news-factly

created: October 25, 2021

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

author: Sai Krishna Muthyanolla


text:
Data: Global FDI Inflows reach a record low in 2020, lowest since 2005
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
June 29, 2021
The COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc and hit the economies of almost all the countries in the world. This impact is clearly visible in the global FDI inflows in 2020, which reached a record low and declined by 35% compared to 2019. The FDI inflows in 2020 were the lowest since 2005.
UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) has recently released its annual World Investment Report (WIR) on 21 June 2021. The Annual World Investment Report monitors the global & regional investment trends along with the national & international policy developments that influence these trends. The theme for the ‘World Investments Report -2021’ is ‘Investing in Sustainable Recovery’.
This edition of WIR assumes prominence in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, which has wreaked havoc and hit the economies of most countries. With most of the countries either still struggling with the pandemic or its aftereffects, the role of investment is key in the recovery process and building the future. The latest report reviews investment in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the influence of investment policies on public health & economic recovery from the pandemic.
Our recent story looks at the role of ‘Research & Development’ in meeting the SDG targets based on the latest UNESCO Science Report. The WIR-2021 looks at the role of Investment in meeting SDG targets.  In this story, we focus on the trends in ‘Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)’ in countries across the world.
Global FDI inflow down by 35 % in 2020
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) plays a key role in the developing and poorer regions of the world. Many of these investments are made in various projects that help these countries in meeting the SDG targets. Apart from various projects, these investments include ‘Green-field Investments’ i.e., FDIs by a parent company by creating a subsidiary in other country by building the operations from ground. Such investments have a large impact on the community.
For the year 2020, the Global FDI inflows were $998.89 billion. This is 35% less the Global FDI inflows in 2019, which was around $1.53 trillion. The report observes that this is the lowest since 2005.
Even during the Global Financial crisis in 2009, the global FDI inflows were $1.18 trillion i.e., around 18% more than the FDI inflows in 2020. As per the WIR-2021 report, lockdowns around the world due to the COVID-19 pandemic have slowed down the existing investment projects. The prospects of a recession have resulted in many of the multi-national enterprises to re-assess new projects.
While the volume of decline in FDI inflows was stark in 2020, there has been a general declining trend in the last few years. The increase in global FDI inflows in 2019 followed a two-year decline post-2016.
If the trends from 2005 are analysed, it is observed that the volume of Global FDI inflows has been inconsistent year-on-year, with years of higher investments followed by a decline and then an increase. Since 2005, the greatest FDI inflows were in 2016 with $2.06 trillion.  Along with the declining trend in FDI inflows, the volume of global FDI outflows has also reduced in 2020.
Developed Countries have a higher decline in both FDI Inflows & Outflows
The major reason for the overall fall in the Global FDI inflows in 2020 is because of the considerable decline observed in both the Developed Economies and the Transition Economies, where-in it fell by 58% compared to the 2019 figures.
The higher decline observed in the Developed Economies and the comparatively better performance by the developing economies is due to the trends in few specific countries.
Because of the decline in FDI inflows for 2020, the share of Developed Economies in the Global FDI inflows has reduced from 49% in 2019 to 31% in 2020. Meanwhile, the share of Developing Economies increased from 47% in 2019 to 66% in 2020.
Even in the case of FDI outflows, there is a decline reported in the Developed economies. The FDI outflow was $347 billion in 2020 in these economies, compared to $780 billion in 2019 i.e. a decline of 55.5 %. This is contributed majorly by the Netherlands along with Germany & Japan.
The FDI outflow of transition economies, which was a lowly $23 billion in 2019 further fell to $5 billion in 2020. As is the case of FDI inflows, the decline for FDI outflows of Developing economies was comparatively lower. In 2020, the FDI outflows for Developing economies were $387 billion, only around 7% less than the $417 billion in 2019.
India along with China & Hong Kong among the developing economies that have reported an increase in FDI inflows
As indicated earlier, the Global trend in FDI inflows & outflows is largely influenced by a select group of countries. Apart from the Netherlands, which has a single major influence on the fall in inflows among the Developed countries, the general trend for most of the countries, irrespective of the economies has been of a decline in 2020 compared to 2019.
Countries across continents & regions have reported a decline in the FDI inflows, even though the level of decline is varied.
The Netherlands also reported a major fall in its FDI outflows. It fell to  -$161 billion from $85 billion in 2019.
Barring a few exceptions, the overwhelming trend in FDI flows for 2020 is that the COVID-19 pandemic & the resultant measures by countries across the world had a negative impact resulting in a decline in FDI inflows and outflows.
Though the trends point out the direction, they do not provide a complete picture of the impact of COVID-19. Analysis of the type of FDI along with the trends of FDI in various sectors could present a more holistic picture of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the FDI flows. We would explore this in detail in the next story.
Featured Image: Global FDI inflows


text:
Global Remittance inflows fall by only 1.6% in 2020 and by 0.2% in India
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
May 22, 2021
Despite 2020 being a difficult year for economies of most countries, global remittances inflows fell by only 1.6%, a much smaller decline than anticipated earlier. In the case of India, remittances fell by only 0.2%. Here are the details.
The World Bank’s Migration and Development Brief 2021 provides updates on global trends in migration and remittances. In this story, we explore the major highlights of the brief and look at the trend of remittances among low and middle-income countries, in the context of COVID-19.
Remittances have become an important consumption smoothing mechanism for the recipient households and, as such, they form an increasingly important (private) element of global social protection systems. As highlighted by World Bank’s Migration and Development Brief 2021, despite COVID-19, remittance flows remained resilient in 2020, registering a smaller decline than previously projected.
Remittance Inflows: Global trends
Below are the major trends in remittance inflows for the year 2020.
Foremost among the drivers of remittance flows and reasons behind their resilience during the crisis was migrants’ desire to help their families, to send money home by cutting consumption, or drawing on savings. Other drivers included fiscal stimulus in host countries that resulted in better-than-expected economic performance, a shift in flows from informal to formal channels, and cyclical movements in oil prices and currency exchange rates.
It is believed that an increase in the recorded flows was in part due to a broad shift of inflows from informal to formal channels in 2020. There was greater use of digital remittance channels as hand-carry was affected by travel bans and lockdowns. The true size of remittances, which includes formal and informal flows, is believed to be larger than officially reported data, though the extent of the impact of COVID-19 on informal flows is unclear.
Remittance Outflows: Global trends
According to the United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs, the worldwide number of international migrants (including refugees) was estimated at 281 million in 2020. The top host countries for migrants are the United States (51 million), Germany (16 million), Saudi Arabia (13 million), Russia (12 million), the United Kingdom (9 million), the United Arab Emirates (9 million), France (9 million), Canada (8 million), Australia (8 million), and Spain (7 million). These countries account for about half of the total international migration stock.
Data on remittance outflows typically get less attention than data on remittance inflows. The largest remittance-sending countries are a mix of high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Gulf Cooperation Council countries (GCC), and large middle-income countries. The United States was the largest sender in 2020, recording around $68 billion in outflows, followed by the United Arab Emirates ($43 billion) and Saudi Arabia ($35 billion). Among middle-income countries, Russia is a large sender ($17 billion) due to its sizable immigrant stock from Europe and Central Asia.
Remittance flows dropped in Q2 but improved in Q3 and Q4
There was a sharp temporary drop in remittance flows in the second quarter (Q2) of 2020, as lockdowns and travel bans imposed in response to the COVID-19 crisis also shut down remittance services. It is possible that migrants postponed sending money during the initial chaos in late March and April 2020. Travel restrictions affected in-kind or cash remittances carried by hand by travelers. However, as some of the strict lockdowns were lifted, there was a recovery in Q3 and Q4 in Latin America and the Caribbean (and other regions).
The initial decline in remittance flows affected almost all countries, especially those in the Europe and Central Asian region. There were a few exceptions, however; remittance flows to Bangladesh, Mexico, and Pakistan continued to increase.
Remittances through digitalisation
The remittances industry has participated in the rapid acceleration of digitalization. Starting June 2020, remittance flows through digital channels increased, especially for migrants with access to bank accounts and credit cards. Many leading money transfer operators reported double-digit growth in their digital services, in sharp contrast to a fall in their cash remittance services.
The switch from cash to digital channels continued throughout 2020. Recent data showed that cross-border remittances processed via mobile money increased by 65%  in 2020 (from $7.7 billion in 2019 to $12 billion in 2020), reaching over $1 billion in transactions sent and received each month.
It is believed that there was also a broad shift in flows from informal to formal channels in 2020. Since digital remittances are better recorded than cash remittances, especially those carried by hand or sent through other informal channels, official data are likely to record more remittances even if the true size of remittances may be falling.
Remittance Trends among South Asian countries during COVID-19 crisis
Inward remittance flows to South Asia rose by about 5.2% in 2020 to $147 billion, driven by a surge in flows to Bangladesh and Pakistan. Contrary to expectation, while the number of outbound migrant workers declined due to the COVID-19 pandemic, recorded remittances to the region remained resilient, perhaps partly due to a shift from informal to formal remittance channels (given restrictions on international travel), additional transfers to support families and friends in need (countercyclicality), and returning migrants choosing to make bulk transfers of savings. It is also possible that the greater use of digital money transfer mechanisms, due to drops in transaction costs and changes in tax policy on remittances, may have encouraged a greater volume of remittances.
Let’s take a look at the trends in remittance inflows among South Asian countries for the past few years. The remittance inflows have consistently registered an overall increase with Bangladesh and Pakistan showing the highest surge of flows last year. Notably, Bangladesh and Pakistan had introduced new remittance tax incentives in 2019 and 2020 respectively.
The brief also highlights that South Asia still had the lowest average remittance costs of any world region at 4.88% in Q4 2020, down slightly from 4.9% a year before.
Impact of COVID-19 crisis vs. 2009 global financial crisis on remittances
This is not the first time that remittance flows have proved resilient during a crisis; the same thing was observed, for example, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis in 2009. However, the decline in recorded remittance flows in 2020 (1.6%) was smaller than the one during the 2009 global financial crisis (4.8%).
The brief explains that remittances often rise in times of financial crisis or natural disasters in the recipient country. Even during a crisis in the host country, migrants may try to reduce consumption (or rent payments) and draw on their savings to continue to send money home. During the COVID-19 crisis, the need for financial support for families back home has risen, for essential goods and services including health care. Remittances have provided a lifeline for families back home struggling with a loss of income and pandemic-induced economic slowdown.
The way forward for Remittances
Looking ahead, remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries are expected to increase by 2.6% and reach $553 billion in 2021 and by 2.2% to reach $565 billion in 2022. Remittances are expected to grow twice as fast in Latin America and the Caribbean and in South Asia, but they are expected to decline further in Europe and Central Asia and remain sluggish in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, these projections are subject to significant risks.
In this context, the brief also suggests supporting remittance infrastructure to keep remittances flowing should include efforts to lower remittance fees, which have continued to average above 6.5% in Q4 2020, more than double the SDG target of 3% by 2030. The average remittance cost was lowest in South Asia, at 4.9% while Sub-Saharan Africa continued to have the highest average cost, at 8.2%.
The relatively strong performance of remittance flows during the COVID-19 crisis also highlighted the importance of timely availability of data. Given its growing significance as a source of external financing for low- and middle-income countries, there is a need for better collection of data on remittances, in terms of frequency, timely reporting, and granularity by corridor and channel.
Featured Image: Global Remittance Inflows


text:
Data: Gold Prices Increased by More Than 6 Times Since 2005
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
February 2, 2023
India is one of the largest Gold markets and also a leading importer of the yellow metal. Data indicates that after a slump in demand during 2019 on account of COVID-19, the demand for gold is back to the pre-pandemic highs. Historical data also indicates that the average yearly price of Gold has increased by more than 6 times since 2005.
Gold occupies a distinct place in the hearts of people, particularly Indians. This yellow metal is regarded as a symbol of wealth and is also perceived as a ‘safe haven’ in terms of investment owing to its liquidity and the ability to hedge during periods of economic stress. Despite the transition to fiat currency, gold still remains a popular choice for the central banks of different nations to safeguard against any macroeconomic emergencies.
Gold does not generate any passive income, unlike other assets. Any income that is generated by gold is only because of price fluctuations. Basic economic theory suggests that any price fluctuations are due to the supply and demand of the good. However, the pricing of gold depends on lot of factors, both domestic as well as international. As a result, gold prices change almost every single day. In fact, gold is seen as a barometer for gauging market behaviour. We look at the trends relating to gold and its pricing in this story.
Determinants of domestic gold prices in India
Daily auctions of precious metals like gold, silver, palladium, and platinum take place in London and the London Bullion Market determines the ‘spot price’ of per ounce of 995K gold. It is a fluctuating market price for an asset bought or sold on commodity exchanges contracted for immediate payment and delivery. A nominal transaction charge is added by importing banks, which when added to the spot price determines the metal value. This metal value in US dollars is converted to Indian Rupees based on the exchange rate. Adding the customs tariff for this metal value gives the ‘landed price’. Once this landed price is arrived at, depending on the government policies, seasonal trends, and market conditions, the Multi Commodity Exchange of India Limited (MCX) and National Commodity and Derivatives Exchange Limited reflect the spot price in the Indian context.
Taxes such as GST are levied on gold bullion and jewellery before any production. Adding to this, the final consumers bear the wastage charges, making charges, and production costs. GST is also applicable on the making charges and wastage charges. The cumulative of all these factors is the domestically determined gold price. Prices could vary above the determined price depending on the sellers’ charges and discounts.
Demand and Supply of Gold in India
It is a common understanding that the dynamics of demand and supply influence the pricing of any good. However, as stated earlier, the pricing of gold is influenced by a wide variety of factors such as inflation, currency exchange value, market conditions, and people’s preferences. The chart below depicts the demand and supply of gold in India as per the data of the World Gold Council. It can be seen that except for the year 2016, the supply of gold exceeded the demand for gold. In the pandemic year of 2020, the demand and supply of gold hit the lowest in the last decade. However, with the easing of COVID-19-related restrictions and the comeback of the Indian wedding season, the demand and supply in 2021 reached almost the 2015 levels
Trend in Gold Prices – both domestic and international
As mentioned earlier, gold prices depend on a lot of factors such as inflation rates, central bank purchases, currency exchange rates, and state taxes. Analysis of the yearly average price of gold from 1985-86 indicates that till 2005-06, there is a gradual increase in the average prices. From 2007-08, there has been an exponential increase in the average price till 2012-13, growing by almost 130% during that period, thereafter which it briefly declined till 2017-18. From 2018-19 to 2020-21, there was an increase in yearly average gold prices by 56%. It is also observed that the yearly average price of gold in Mumbai exceeded that of London from 2012-13.
International and domestic gold prices seem to be closely interlinked, both showing similar variations over a period of time. The fluctuation of domestic gold prices follows that of global gold prices. It is said that due to the liberalisation of the gold market, movements in domestic gold prices should roughly match the international gold prices after adjusting for the exchange rate, which is the case if one looks at the relevant data.
The increase from 2018-19 to date could be attributed to multiple factors such as the introduction of the GST system, which caused an increase in gold prices. There are also other factors such as the easing of COVID-19 restrictions and the resumption of normal economic activity including events such as weddings.
Influence of Exchange Rate on Gold Prices
India is one of the largest importers of Gold. The foreign market affects daily fluctuations in gold prices. Data shows that whenever the value of the Indian rupee depreciates, gold prices generally tend to increase. However, this is not an exact correlation as other factors might also impact the pricing of gold.
For instance, during 2006-07 to 2007-08 and 2007-08 to 2009-10, the value of the rupee appreciated from 45.2 to 40.3 and depreciated from 40.3 to 46 respectively. However, the gold prices during the same corresponding period rose from Rs. 9240 to Rs. 9995 to Rs. 12890. Further, between 2011-2012 and 2012-13, the value of the rupee depreciated from 47.9 to 54.4, while the price of gold jumped from Rs.25,722 to Rs. 30,163. However, from 2012-13 to 2013-14, the value of the rupee depreciated from 54.4 to 60.5, while the price of gold decreased from Rs.30,163 to Rs. 29,190.
Similarly, between 2014-15 to 2015-16, the value of the rupee depreciated from 61.1 to 65.5, while the price of gold declined from Rs.27,414 to Rs. 26,534. However, from 2019-20 to 2020-21, the value of the rupee depreciated from 70.9 to 74.2, while the price of gold increased from Rs.37,017 to Rs. 48,723. This also could be because of low demand and supply in the market, enabling the price volatility of gold.
In most cases, it is observed that changes in exchange rates have caused an increase in gold rates, irrespective of the degree and direction of change. While an exact correlation between average exchange rates and gold prices could not be established, it can be said that they are interlinked, with other factors such as inflation, and market conditions also causing volatility in gold prices.
Featured Image: Gold Prices Increase

created: February 2, 2023


text:
Government makes a five-fold increase in the allocation for Department of Pharmaceuticals in 2022-23
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 17, 2022
COVID-19 highlighted the importance of the domestic pharmaceutical industry. While the Indian pharma industry is among the top-10 in terms of exports, there is heavy reliance on the import of certain essential raw materials. To address this gap, the government has approved multiple incentive schemes and significantly increased the allocation to the Department of Pharmaceuticals in the 2022-23 budget.
The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated that the government divert the funds towards pandemic-critical sectors. The health sector was one such that needed immediate intervention to manage various issues related to the pandemic including but not limited to spending towards infrastructure, resources, personnel, etc.
The experience during the pandemic also highlighted the need for the governments to re-strategize their spending on such critical sectors to be able better handle any such future situation. Among the varied requirements that became critical during the pandemic was access to common drugs & medicines used for the treatment of COVID-19.  There was a significant increase in demand for different kinds of drugs commonly used in COVID-19 treatment protocol in addition to the need to come up with & manufacture new drugs.
In this context, we look at the trends in budget allocation for the Department of Pharmaceuticals (DoP). This department is part of the Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers.
Fivefold increase in the Budget allocation in 2022-23 compared to 2021-22
The Department of Pharmaceuticals was created on 01 July 2008 as part of the Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers. The objective of the department is to focus on the development of the pharmaceutical sector and regulate various issues such as pricing & availability of medicines at affordable prices, research & development, protection of intellectual property rights, international commitments, etc.
Trends in recent years indicate an increase in the allocation to the department, which is understandable in wake of the COVID-19 pandemic in the country. However, the trends vary in terms of the initial budget estimates and the actual expenditure over the years.
During 2018-19, the actual expenditure was twice the budget estimates. The budget estimates for the year were Rs. 261 crores, while the actual expenditure for the year was Rs. 523 crores. While the budget estimates for 2019-20 were on par with those of the previous year, they were revised to Rs. 562 crores, closer to the actual expenditure incurred in 2018-19.
In the pandemic hit 2020-21, the initial budget estimates for the DoP were Rs. 333 crores, which the government revised to Rs. 470.4 crores. However, as per the details provided in the latest budget documents, the actual expenditure for 2020-21was Rs. 456 crores. This is not only slightly lower than the revised estimates but also lower than the actual expenditure for the previous two years.
The latest budget also highlights the substantial increase in focus & allocation to the DoP in 2022-23. The revised estimates for 2021-22 were increased to Rs. 823 crores from the earlier budget estimates of Rs. 470 crores. However, a substantial increase was observed in the budget estimates for 2022-23. The budget estimates for 2022-23 for the DoP stand at Rs. 2.24 thousand crores, which is nearly 5 times the budget estimates of 2021-22.
Prior to the pandemic, the majority of the Department’s expenditure was towards NIPERs
As the overall numbers indicate, there is a major increase in the estimates for 2021-22 & 2022-23. Before we look at the details of the increased allocation, here is a look at the trends in expenditure incurred by the DoP prior to the onset of the pandemic.
The budget data indicates that a major portion of the expenditure incurred by the department prior to the pandemic was towards NIPERs (National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research). The first NIPER was setup in Mohali and was given statutory recognition under NIPER Act,1998. A total of 6 more NIPERs were established in 2007-08. The main purpose is to promote quality & excellence in pharmaceutical education & research.
Barring 2018-19, there has been a year-on-year increase in the actual expenditure incurred on NIPERs in recent years. During 2020-21, there is a major increase in the actual expenditure compared to 2019-20. The actual expenditure in 2020-21 was Rs. 306.3 crores, while it was only Rs. 160 crores in 2019-20. The budget estimates for 2020-21 were Rs. 184.45 crores, which was revised to Rs. 306.3 crores because of the pandemic.
There was also increased allocation towards another Central Sector scheme i.e., Jan Aushadhi Scheme. The objective of this Scheme is to make quality generic medicines more accessible to the public at a significantly lower price than branded medicines. Prior to the pandemic, there was a declining trend in the actual allocation made towards this scheme. However, in 2020-21, the Actual allocation increased, and the recent estimates are also higher than earlier.
Earlier, we have highlighted that the actual expenditure for 2018-19 & 2019-20 is much higher than the initial budget estimates for the year. While there is no major increase in allocation for the aforementioned Central Sector Schemes, the expenditure was incurred for other reasons.
Promotion of Bulk Drug Parks, Medical parks & Production linked Incentives part of the latest Budget
In the Budget speech during the presentation of Budget for 2022-23, the Pharmaceutical industry is earmarked as one of the Sunrise opportunity sectors, with an immense potential to assist sustainable development. The government’s assistance towards such sectors includes – supportive policies, light-touch regulations, promotion of Research & Development, building domestic capabilities, etc.
The increase in revised estimates for 2021-22 compared to the budget estimates, and the multi-fold increase in budget estimates for the Department of Pharmaceuticals in 2022-23 reflects the emphasis on this sector. The COVID-19 pandemic which highlighted the need to ramp up the infrastructure as well as the R&D capabilities can also be cited as a contributory factor.
Here is a look at a few of the key heads under which the allocation is made as per the 2022-23 budget.
An allocation of Rs. 137 crores are made as per the revised estimates for 2021-22 and Rs. 120 crores as per budget estimates for 2022-23 towards Scheme for ‘Promotion of Medical Device Parks’. This is part of Rs. 400 crores of financial outlay towards the scheme for the period 2020-21 to 2024-25. The purpose of the scheme is to provide infrastructural facilities at one place (parks) to increase the medical equipment manufacturing capabilities.
Furthermore Rs. 3 crores are allocated both in the revised estimates for 2021-22 & budget estimates for 2022-23 towards the PLI scheme for Pharmaceuticals in the budget presented for 2022-23.
The increased allocation towards encouraging the R&D, manufacturing in Pharmaceuticals through various incentive schemes is a step in the right direction. COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of the Pharma industry as well as the prowess of India’s pharma industry. As rightly identified by the government, India’s Pharmaceutical industry is highly reliant on imports for certain essential ingredients and the increased budget allocation is expected to encourage domestic production. However, it remains to be seen if these schemes take off on the ground and produce the expected outcomes.
Featured Image: Allocation for Department of Pharmaceuticals


text:
Data: Government Procurement of Millets At MSP Negligible Compared To Rice & Wheat
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 15, 2023
Data suggests that while substantial amounts of Rice & Wheat are procured by the government at MSP, the government procurement in the case of Millets is negligible, except in the case of Ragi. It is not even 5% in the case of other millets.
The year 2023 is being observed as the ‘International Year of Millets’ by the UN, following India’s proposal. The objective behind observing the year of millets is to promote the production, consumption, and export of millets through the creation of domestic & global demand for millets. The focus is on the sustainable production of millets and the nutrition security it can help achieve.
In the first story of this series on millets, we looked at the different benefits of millets and their potential to address various Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Numerous measures have been rolled out by both Union and State governments to popularize millets, especially in the last few years.
Despite these efforts, there hasn’t been a significant improvement in the production of millets or nutri- cereals in India as highlighted in the previous story. The production was more than 200 lakh tonnes in 2010-11 and dropped to 137.1 tonnes in 2018-19. Despite the improvement in production in the subsequent two years, the production dropped again in 2021-22 and is estimated to drop further, though marginally, in 2022-23. The production of Jowar, Ragi, and other small millets has also been on a decline in recent years. Jowar, Ragi, & Bajra are the only millets that are currently covered under the Minimum Support Price (MSP) regime.
Among other initiatives proposed to promote millets, the Union government will also focus on enhancing the procurement of millets by states. Usually, coarse grains including maize and millets covered under MSP, are procured from the farmers by the State governments based on their plan of procurement with prior approval of the Central government and subject to distribution of procured coarse grain under the Targeted Public Distribution System (TPDS) in the procuring state.
Procurement of coarse grains is very low compared to rice and wheat
According to data from a parliament response, the quantity of rice and wheat procured by the government has increased in the last five years. Between 2017-18 and 2021-22, the procurement of rice went up from 568 LMT to 881 LMT registering an increase of 55% while that of wheat went up by almost 41% from 308 LMT to 433 LMT. On the other hand, among coarse grains, the procurement of Jowar increased considerably from 0.026 LMT to about 1.57 LMT during the same period. The procurement of Bajra which had improved significantly until 2020-21 saw a sudden drop in 2021-22. However, in 2022-23, as of 07 December 2022, over 1.1 LMT of Bajra was procured. Likewise, the procurement of Maize also dropped in 2021-22 and improved in 2022-23. The quantity of Ragi procured also increased more than 5 times between 2018-19 and 2020-21 and dropped marginally in 2022-23.
Production data for these crops have been taken from RBI’s Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy 2021-22. On comparing the procurement with the production, the following trends can be observed during the last five years period:
In short, it is evident that the share of coarse grains procured is much lower compared to wheat and paddy. While there is an improvement in the share of Ragi procured, the procurement of other coarse grains has not even crossed 5%.
7 states are major contributors to procurement of coarse grains
During the last five years, seven states have been the major contributors to the production and procurement of coarse grains. These are Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, and Uttar Pradesh. To understand the difference in the procurement of the staple grains of rice and wheat, and coarse grains across states, the production and procurement of the crops in these seven states have been considered. For paddy, data is available for 2016-17 to 2020-21 and for the rest, data for 2017-18 to 2021-22 is available. Also, for Karnataka and Odisha, data on wheat procurement is not available.
With respect to coarse grains, procurement is the highest in Karnataka as compared to other states. Karnataka accounted for 44% of the procurement at the national level in 2018-19 which has increased steadily to 81% in 2021-22. During this period, Maharashtra’s share has dropped from 71% in 2017-18 to less than 7% in 2021-22.
Haryana procures the highest share of wheat and paddy
In terms of percentage share of procurement as against the production, the share of wheat procured increased from 69% to 81% between 2017-18 and 2021-22 in Haryana and from 12% to 17% in Uttar Pradesh.  Madhya Pradesh recorded 42% procurement in 2017-18 which increased to 71% in 2020-21 and dropped to 57% in 2021-22. The share of wheat procured in Gujarat increased from 0.2% to 5% in this period, while Maharashtra’s share is negligible.
Similarly, for paddy, the procurement has improved in the states of Madhya Pradesh (46% to 84% between 2016-17 and 2020-21), Maharashtra (15% to 58%), Odisha (65% to 88%) and Uttar Pradesh (26% to 43%). In Gujarat and Karnataka too, the share of paddy procured had touched 5% in 2020-21, up from less than 1% in 2017-18. Haryana procured paddy from other states as well as a result of which its procurement is more than 100%.
In the case of coarse grains, like the trend at the national level, the procurement shares are low across all these states. In Gujarat, the share has been less than 1% throughout the five years whereas, in Karnataka, the share has increased from 2% in 2018-19 to 7% in 2020-21 and 2021-22. Odisha too has witnessed an increase in procurement touching 7% in 2020-21 and 9% in 2021-22. In Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, except in 2020-21, the share was below 1% in the remaining four years. While Haryana also witnessed an increase from 2% to 11% in the first four years, Maharashtra witnessed a decline from 3% in 2019-20 to less than 1% in 2021-22.
To summarize, Haryana’s procurement has been comparatively higher across staples as well as coarse grains. On the other hand, procurement has been low in Gujarat. While other states like Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh had better procurement of at least one of the staple crops or both, their procurement of coarse grains was relatively low. Karnataka and Odisha had a higher procurement of coarse grains including the three millets. It is noteworthy that Karnataka and Odisha have their own millet promotion initiatives which are considered success stories for the country to follow.
Efforts being made to include millets in welfare schemes
India being the world’s largest producer of millets and running the world’s largest public food distribution system, the Union government has taken initiatives to promote millets under the Public Distribution System (PDS). However, only those millets covered under the MSP are part of the PDS. These millets covered under MSP are also part of the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme.
To make procurement and distribution of coarse grains including millets covered under MSP easier for States as well as to increase their procurement under Central Pool, the government has enhanced the distribution period/shelf life to up to six months for maize, nine months for jowar & bajra and ten months for ragi from the earlier period of three months. With this move, the government aims to increase procurement and consumption of these commodities as the States would have more time to distribute these commodities in Target Public Distribution System, Mid-Day Meal, and other welfare schemes.
Data suggests that India must focus on both production and demand-creation for attaining its objectives in this international year of millets since there hasn’t been much progress on this front.


text:
Government reports a reduction in Forest Land encroachment while questions remain over data reliability
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
March 25, 2022
Data related to forest area encroachment is updated by the states and there is no frequency for its measurement. While some states do perform regular exercises regarding encroachment, some states do not.  As per a recent answer in the Lok Sabha, the forest land under encroachment has reduced significantly. However, the reliability of  this data is questionable because of the lack of clear guidelines & definitions.
Forests have always been integral to mankind throughout history. In pre-independent India, the forests were treated as the primary source of timber and wood for railway expansion, which allowed the spread of the British territory to the hinterlands. Looking at the significant destruction of forests during the British era, the post-independent rulers had a different vision for forests. Accordingly, the first National Forest Policy (NFP) was formulated in 1952, which outlined its objectives through six paramount needs of the country. It called to achieve a balance between using forests for economic development and adopting measures to ensure that the land deterioration shall be least. It aims to maintain one-third of India’s land area under forests.
The decades following the 1950s were riddled with multiple environmental disasters, which ignited environmental awareness across the globe. The ‘Silent Spring’, written by Rachel Carson in 1962, talked about the harmful effects of indiscriminate use of pesticides on humankind and soon became a rallying point for environmental governance in the 1960s. This was followed by the first UN Environmental Conference in Stockholm in 1972 and a series of international treaties for environmental justice were adopted later. In 1987, the Brundtland Commission report, ‘Our Common Future’ highlighted the concept of sustainable development. It echoed the idea that the environment should also be an approach towards the development, and it is an issue of social justice, and an integrated strategy should be adopted for managing the commons.
Amidst all these global as well as regional developments, the Indian Government revised the NFP in 1988. The NFP 1988 was envisioned for maintaining environmental stability by preservation, restoration and promoting tree cover through forestry programs and afforestation. It also called for actively creating a people’s movement involving women to reduce the existing pressures on forests. It clearly acknowledged the rights and concessions of tribals and gives them the first preference on forest produce. It calls for involving tribal people to associate with the forest development corporations.
The NFP 1988 could not fully achieve its objectives. The government had come up with the Draft National Forest Policy, 2018 which has not been materialized to date. This draft had invited serious criticism for several of its initiatives. Interestingly, this draft NFP talks very little about the rights of the tribals and the concessions provided to them but places heavy emphasis on maximizing forest productivity. The non-consultation of Ministry of Tribal affairs during the preparation of this draft as highlighted by the Parliamentary standing committee is testimony to the lack of focus on the tribal population.
In this story, we look at the trends in the forest cover, with a specific focus on the encroachment of forest lands. The information is primarily sourced and collated from the data provided by the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change (MoEFCC) in the parliament questions from 2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2022.
Forest Cover Since 1987
The NFP 1952 aimed at achieving one-third of India’s total area to be under forest cover. However, even after 70 years of the first NFP, the target is not met. The forest cover has been hovering between 19% and 23%. Since 2013, the forest cover has been growing gradually, albeit minimally. The top five states that improved the forest cover in 2021 over 2019 are Andhra Pradesh (647 Square Kilometres), Telangana (632 sq. Km), Odisha (537 sq. Km), Karnataka (155 sq. Km) and Jharkhand (110 sq. Km). The states that have reported reduced forest cover over 2019 are Arunachal Pradesh (257 sq.Km), Manipur (249 sq. Km), Nagaland (235 sq. Km), Mizoram (186 sq. Km) and Meghalaya (73 sq. Km). Overall, a total of 17 States and Union Territories have forest cover above 33% of their geographical area, as per the latest data released by the government.
However, one must be careful in taking the forest cover at its face value. It is essential to look at the key changes that each assessment of forest surveys made. These changes could be in the definition of forest cover, the type of technology and methodology used, unverifiable data, and so on.
It is ironic that there is no legal definition of what exactly constitutes ‘forest’. The Supreme Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs. Union of India & Ors (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995) clarified that ‘forest land’ should not only be understood in the dictionary sense but any area recorded as forest by the government irrespective of ownership. The Forest Survey of India (FSI) which conducts the biennial ‘State of forest’ surveys defines forests as, ‘lands that have a tree canopy density of more than 10 per cent when projected vertically on the horizontal ground, within a minimum areal extent of one hectare.’ It does not talk about ownership or land use.  This issue was also examined by the Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests in its 324th report, submitted in 2019. Such confusing definitions could lead to different interpretations and can have dire consequences.
Encroachment pattern from 2004
Before we look at the data of encroachment of forest land across the states, it is important to understand that:
As per the data provided in various parliament answers, the cumulative encroached forest land in 2004 was 13.43 lakh hectares. This increased to 17.94 lakh hectares in 2007, which further increased to 19.53 lakh hectares in 2013. This decreased to 15.16 lakh hectares in 2016, which reduced to 12.81 lakh hectares in 2019 and to 7.41 lakh hectares in 2022.  These are the cumulative figures provided by the government.
Encroachment trend at the state level
The area of encroached forest land varies widely across the states. While some states do have minimal variation over the years, some states have reported significant changes over the years. For the following chart, data of eight states has been considered. Assam stands out as the state that has seen considerable encroachment of forest land. States like Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Karnataka have reported a drastic reduction in encroachment in 2022 compared to 2016. There is no consistent increase or decrease of encroachments across the various states.
It must be noted that if any state has two similar values for two different years, it can be interpreted as the lack of updated data. As mentioned earlier, in the absence of a proper definition for encroachment, the assumption that the data of all these states refers to something similar could be misleading.
Share of states in total encroached forest land:
These 8 states (Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, and Madhya Pradesh) account for more than 60% of the total encroached forest land in the country. The share of Andhra Pradesh has been consistently falling from 2004 till 2019, while Assam’s share has been growing from 2013 to 2022. Madhya Pradesh was the highest contributor for 2013, 2016 and 2019 respectively. Kerala’s share has always been less than 1% except in 2013 when the share rose to 2.1%. Another state that has shown considerable improvement in decreasing its share is Chhattisgarh, whose share went from 11.2% in 2004 to 1% in 2022.
There may be other states that contributed more in either of the years, but for the sake of data consistency compared to other states, these eight states have been considered for the analysis.
Featured Image: Forest Land encroachment


text:
Data: Grievance Numbers Reported by SSMIs in Their Compliance Reports Do Not Indicate Any Specific Trend
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
April 15, 2024
The Government notified The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 in which it made it mandatory for Significant Social Media Intermediaries (SSMIs) to publish monthly compliance reports that contained data on multiple items including grievances & action taken. The data reported by the SSMIs do not indicate any specific trend.
Use of social media as a mode of communication is a routine affair in the digital world we live in. Social media has grown exponentially in the last decade, both globally and in India so much so that it has become almost inevitable, if not avoidable. Its usage in India has also grown significantly over the years According to an estimate of Forbes, there are about 398 million users of social media in India as of 2023, who are of age 18 and above. The same estimate also says that 67.5% of all internet users in India use at least one social media platform. An average Indian person is estimated to spend about 145 minutes every day on social media, which is about 15% of the normal non-sleeping active time (16 hours) of an individual in a day.
However, along with several positive outcomes and advantages of using social media, the last decade has also seen a negative fallout, such as the spread of hateful content, violent content, adult content, and misinformation, among several others. The harmful effects of these are widely acknowledged which affect both individuals and society.
The Government of India has launched a fact-checking unit which as per the objectives is to address misinformation about the government. The Press Information Bureau (PIB) has a dedicated fact checking unit which takes up certain types of claims and publishes fact-checking reports. Similarly, in the wake of upcoming general elections, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has come up with a dedicated portal called “Myth Vs Reality” to check the spread of misinformation about elections and to provide correct information to the people.
Along with these, in the year 2021, the Government of India notified The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (Digital Media Rules), which made it mandatory for Significant Social Media Intermediaries (SSMIs) to publish every month the information containing the details of different types of complaints/grievances that they received from their subscribers and the action taken against them, including details of proactive action taken by them.
Against this backdrop, we look at the trends number and the types of grievances received by some of the SSMIs. Additionally, we also analyse if there was any increase in the number of grievances or actions taken during elections.
Methodology
The data has been sourced from the Dataful collection of datasets on the compliance reports submitted by the SSMIs.
Lack of Uniformity in Grievance Categorization and Action Taken
Though the Digital Media Rules have made it mandatory for SSMIs to publish monthly data about grievances, it has, however, not prescribed any specific categorization or format in which they are to publish the data. Therefore, as of date, each SSMI publishes the data and the compliance reports in its own desired format. This has led to a lack of uniformity. Part of this is understandable because of the differences in the nature of platforms, and the type of actions taken.
For example, WhatsApp categorizes grievances/complaints it has received by categories such as Account Support, Ban Appeal, Product Support, etc. It does not distinguish grievances by their nature such as Violence, hate speech, etc. Some of the other SSMIs such as Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc. categorize the number of grievances received by their nature such as Abuse/Harassment, Account Hacked, etc. Even with these categories, there is no standardization. For instance, Twitter (X) distinguishes adult sexual content as Sensitive Adult Content, and Child Sexual Exploitation whereas, Facebook and ShareChat categorize the same grievance as Sexually Explicit Content, Content showing me in Nudity/Partial Nudity or in a Sexual Act and Inappropriate or Abusive Content, etc., without specifying whether it includes sexual content including children, etc. Therefore, even similar type of grievances is categorized and grouped at the discretion of the SSMIs.
Further, each of the SSMIs has its own terms for reporting the types of action taken on grievances received. For example, Facebook and Instagram categorize Action taken as ‘Content Actioned’, which is defined as including “removing a piece of content from Facebook or Instagram or covering photos or videos that may be disturbing to some audiences with a warning.” The definition does not distinguish between the number of accounts from which a piece of content has been removed and the number of accounts from which photos or videos have been covered. Similarly, WhatsApp has its own categorization. It stipulates action taken as ‘Accounts Actioned’, which is defined as “either banning an account or a previously banned account being restored as a result of the complaint”. Therefore, it is not clear how many accounts each month have been banned and how many have been restored under the category of Number of Accounts Actioned. Similarly, the other SSMIs have their own categorization and definition of action taken on the grievances received by them.
Therefore, as of date, the data reported by SSMIs on the types of grievances received and action taken is not uniform across all the SSMIs. In the absence of the same, it is not possible to analyse which specific types of grievances have been reported, and which ones have increased or decreased during specific periods, among others. These have to be considered while reading the numbers.
Data shows increase in the Number of Grievances
As mentioned, each of the SSMIs reports monthly on the number of grievances received and action taken, though there are differences in categorization and grouping. The analysis of the data published by some of the SSMIs shows an increase in the total grievances reported over the years.
The data shows that the total number of grievances received by Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, and Google have increased from 2 to 190, 5 to 222, 4 to 104, 2 to 18 and 510 to 714 thousand, respectively between 2021 & 2023.
Number of reported grievances vary across Years and SSMIs
As mentioned, the types of grievances which are reported across the SSMIs vary from one SSMI to another.
As per the data, the major grievance reported on Instagram in the year 2021 was the Hacking of Accounts, which accounted for 1161. This is followed by a Fake Profile with 492 complaints. However, in 2022, the Fake Profile grievances have risen to 29,447 while Account hacking grievances have stood at 6,518. In 2023, both grievances were overtaken by the number of Inappropriate/Abusive Content and Bullying/Harassment grievances which stood at 54,269 and 46,312 respectively. In the same year, the Hacking of Accounts and Fake Profile grievances stood at 29,715 and 31,555, respectively.
In the case of Facebook, the number of grievances related to Account Hacking was highest in 2021 with 1,611 followed by undefined ‘Other issues’ with 1,133. The same pattern was also visible in 2022. But, in 2023, Bullying/Harassment marked the highest with 72,221 grievances, followed by Inappropriate/Abusive Content with 63,295 grievances. In the same year, the Hacking of Accounts and Fake Profile grievances stood at 29,715 and 31,555, respectively.
On Twitter (X), Abuse/Harassment stood as the highest reported across all the years from 2021 to 2023. However, the number of other types of grievances varied each year. In 2021, the grievance of Impersonation stood next to Abuse/Harassment with 674 grievances. This is followed by Defamation and IP infringement with 442 and 347 grievances, respectively. In 2022 and 2023, the Hateful Conduct grievances were second highest with 1,450 and 4,935 respectively.
Numbers reported by Google present a different picture. Across all the years, the grievance of Copyright stood as the highest with 271548, 366849 and 331811 grievances respectively in the years 2021, 2022 and 2023. This is because Google data includes YouTube grievances. The grievance of Defamation was next with 3,066 grievances in 2021. However, in 2022 and 2023, the grievance of Trademark occupied the second position with 8,864 and 15,479 respectively.
Therefore, the types of grievances received by SSMIs have varied by each year and from one SSMI to another.
Grievances of Account Hacking, Fake Profile and Losing Access to Page managed by Individual saw increase in Facebook during the 2023 Assembly Elections
We also looked at the total number of grievances received each month by major SSMIs in the year 2023 to understand whether the number of grievances increased during November and December 2023, when the Assembly Elections of 5 States were held compared to other months.
As per the data, there was no considerable increase in the number of grievances received by SSMIs such as Google, WhatsApp, Instagram, and Twitter during this period. In January 2023, Google received 77,560 grievances and in May 2023, it was 56,602. In October 2023, it rose to 89,028 grievances and then reduced to 39,360 and 43,480 in the months of November and December 2023, respectively. Similarly, there was no noticeable increase in the number of grievances raised with WhatsApp, Instagram, and Twitter also, during November and December 2023, compared to other months of the year.
However, the data showed a significant increase in the number of grievances received by Facebook during December 2023 compared to other months. As per the data, in January 2023, Facebook received 700 grievances and in July 2023, it was 28,012. In October, November, and December 2023 however, it received 25920, 21449 and 44332 grievances, respectively. In December 2023, which is when election results were announced, Facebook received a greater number of grievances compared to other months. During the same month, the types of grievances that showed an increase compared to other months were Account Hacking, Fake Profiles that is pretending to be Me and Losing Access to a Page or Group managed by Me. As the data in the table below indicates, the increase in these types of grievances may not be attributable to the elections since the increase in numbers was significant in December 2023 when the elections were complete.
To summarize, the numbers do not indicate any specific trend with respect to grievances received by the SSMIs. This could also be because of the type of categorization and grouping.


text:
Data: Ground Water Schemes Make Up Nearly 95% of the Minor Irrigation Schemes in India - FACTLY
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
September 8, 2023
Minor Irrigation Schemes (MIS) include both groundwater schemes as well as surface water schemes. As per the recently released 6th Minor Irrigation Census report, ground water schemes constitute a major part of MIS. About 94.8% of all the minor irrigation schemes in the country are groundwater schemes. Out of the total 2.31 crore MIS across the country, 2.19 crores were groundwater schemes.
Agriculture continues to be the primary activity in India. It not only provides employment to a major section of the population but also ensures food security. Over the years, the importance of Agri-products in international trade has also increased.
Agricultural production and productivity are dependent to a large extent on the availability of water.  India has a high dependence on monsoons, as it recharges the groundwater levels and replenishes water bodies.  However, the vagaries of the monsoons require effective water management to collect and store water for future usage when required.  Irrigation projects are an effective way to manage water resources.
Since the very first Five-year plan, India has laid emphasis on irrigation. Major projects like Bhakra, Hirakud, Damodar Valley, etc. were initiated during this plan period. The emphasis continued in the later years as well. Apart from the major irrigation projects, another key component of irrigation in India is the Minor Irrigation Schemes.
A Minor irrigation scheme is a type of irrigation project that uses surface or groundwater to irrigate an area of up to 2,000 hectares. These schemes have short gestation periods and require lower investments.
6th Census of Minor Irrigation Schemes conducted for the reference year 2017-18
Minor irrigation schemes have a direct benefit to the farmer and are beneficial to the rural economy. Information relating to the minor irrigation schemes in the country helps in framing plans of action, effective utilisation of available resources, policy making, and for research.
A census on minor irrigation schemes generates such information. Recently, the Ministry of Jal Shakti released the 6 Census report on Minor Irrigation Schemes.
The first survey was conducted for 1986-87. Another four surveys were conducted for the years 1993-94, 2000-01, 2006-07 and 2013-14. The latest report is for the reference year 2017-18. The release of the same was delayed since the census work was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.  The information for this census report is gathered from various sources.
The first census of water bodies was also conducted in convergence with the 6 minor irrigation schemes census. Factly’s series of articles on the Census of Water bodies can be read here, here, here & here.
Ground Water accounts for nearly 95% of the Minor Irrigation Schemes in the 6th Census
As indicated above in the definition, Minor Irrigation Schemes (MIS) include both Ground water schemes as well as Surface water schemes. The Ground water schemes include – dug wells, dug-cum-bore wells, shallow, medium, and deep tube wells. Surface flow schemes and Surface lift schemes are categorised as Surface schemes.
As was the case with the earlier census, groundwater schemes constitute a major part of MIS. As per the 6th Census report, 94.8% of all the minor irrigation schemes in the country are groundwater schemes. Out of the total 2.31 crore MIS across the country, 2.19 crores were groundwater schemes.
The total number of MIS in the 6 census increased by nearly 6.56% compared to that of the 5 census.  This increase is mainly aided by the increase in the number of medium and deep tube wells. Medium tube wells increased by nearly 36%, while deep tube wells increased by 43%.  Meanwhile, the number of Dug wells has decreased by nearly 6%, as is the case with even shallow tube wells.  In the case of Surface Water MIS, there is an increase in the number of Surface Flow schemes.
97% of the schemes are in use
During the 6 MI census, the total number of schemes that are in use has increased marginally compared to the 5th MI census. Overall, there is a fall in the number of schemes not in use during the 6th Census compared to that of the 5 Census. During the 5 Census, 5.6 lakh MIS were temporarily not in use, while it fell to 4.85 lakhs in the latest census. Around 2.85 lakh MIS were permanently not in use during the 5th Census, which fell to 2.15 lakhs during the 6 Census.
Compared to surface water schemes, a higher proportion of groundwater schemes are in use.
Among the groundwater schemes, 98.5% of the shallow tube wells are in use, while in the case of medium tube wells, 98.4 % of them are in use. Comparatively, 95.7% of Deep Tube wells are in use. While 3.4% are temporarily in use, around 0.9% i.e., nearly 32.8 thousand deep tube wells are not in use.
Among the groundwater MIS, 65.3% of those that are temporarily not in use are because of ‘Less Discharge of Water’. Meanwhile, drying up is the major reason (54.1%) for the groundwater MIS to be permanently not in use. Around 6% of the Surface flow schemes are Temporarily not in use, while another 2% are permanently not in use. ‘Less Discharge of Water’ followed by ‘channel break down’ are the major reasons for Surface water MIS not being temporarily in use. Meanwhile, ‘dried up’ accounts for 30% of the Surface water MIS not being permanently used, followed by “destroyed beyond repair”.
UP, Maharashtra, MP & Tamil Nadu account for more than half of Minor Irrigation Schemes
Uttar Pradesh has the largest number of minor irrigation Schemes in India. As per the 6 census, around 17% of the schemes i.e., 39.7 lakh MIS are in the state. Maharashtra accounts for around 15% of the schemes with 35.7 lakh MIS. Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu & Telangana complete the top-5 with 22.8, 21.1, and 16.7 lakh MIS respectively. These top 5 states account for around 59% of the total MIS in India. These five states also have the highest share of groundwater minor irrigation schemes in the same order as overall MIS.
However, in the case of Surface water schemes, Maharashtra has the highest number followed by Karnataka, Telangana, Odisha, and Jharkhand.
10 States out of 32 States/UTs, have more than 10 lakh MI schemes each. Seven States have MI schemes ranging between 1 lakh to 10 lakh each. The remaining 15 States/UTs have less than 1 lakh schemes each.
As highlighted above, groundwater schemes have a proportionally larger share compared to surface water schemes. This trend is true for most of the states except Northeast States. Across most of the North-east states, the proportion of surface water schemes is higher. The geography of the region has a bearing on this.
Census highlights underutilisation among the in-use schemes
The Census report highlights that under-utilisation of the ‘in-use’ MIS is the gap between irrigation potential created and irrigation potential utilised.
Out of the 2.24 crore MIS that are in use, around 14% of the schemes are highlighted to be having constraints in utilization due to reasons like – mechanical breakdown, less discharge of water, storage not fully filled up, non-availability of adequate power supply, etc.  Among the groundwater MIS, Mechanical breakdown and less discharge of water are the major reasons for underutilization of the in-use MIS. Mechanical Breakdown is also the main reason in the case of Surface Water MIS that are in use and being under-utilised.

created: September 8, 2023


text:
Data: Gujarat accounts for about 28% of the Hazardous Waste generated in India
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
December 14, 2021
In response to a question in the Lok Sabha, the government recently shared data related to the generation of various types of waste in the last few years. Generation of all types of waste increased over the years in varying degrees. Gujarat accounted for about 28% of the hazardous waste generated in the country in 2019-20.
As per World Bank data, 2.01 billion tonnes of solid waste is generated annually around the world. As per conservative estimates, at least 33% of this waste is not managed in an environmentally safe manner. High-income countries account for 34% of the global waste while accounting for only 16% of the population. However, they are far ahead in waste collection rates with 96%, while in the case of Low-middle income and Low-income countries it is 51% and 39% respectively. Apart from waste collection, waste disposal is also an important issue. Around 37% of the global waste is disposed of in some form of landfill and 19% is recovered for recycling or composting. It is estimated that global waste will grow to 3.4 billion tonnes by 2050.
Increased human activity across various walks of life contributes to the generation of waste. With a population of 1.39 billion and among the faster-growing economies in the world, how does India fare with respect to Waste generation & management? In this story, we look at the data relating to Waste generation & management in India for the last few years.
The average annual increase of Plastic Waste is 21.8%
Responding to a question in Lok Sabha, the government recently (on 06 December 2021) furnished data relating to Waste generated, collected, and processed in the country. The information is based on the annual data compiled by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The data consists of information relating to the generation of solid waste, plastic waste, e-waste, construction & demolition (C&D) waste, Bio-medical waste (BMW) & Hazardous waste.
This information is collected from the respective State pollution control boards or pollution control committees i.e., SPCBs/PCCs. As per the information by CPCB, there is an increase in the generation of all the major types of waste, the more prominent being Plastic Waste.  The average annual increase observed in the generation of Plastic waste is 21.6%.  Bio-Medical waste recorded an average annual increase of 5.8%.  Hazardous waste has an average annual increase of 2%, with the average increase in solid waste being around 0.1%.
87.82 lakh Metric tons of Hazardous waste generated in 2019-20
Any waste with properties that make it dangerous and or capable of having a harmful effect on human health or the environment is considered as ‘Hazardous Waste’ (HW). It is generated from various sources including – Industrial waste, batteries, mining, agricultural facilities, etc.
As per the data provided by CPCB, in the year 2019-20, 87.82 lakh metric tons (LMT) of Hazardous waste was generated in the country. This was a slight increase over the previous year when it was 86.39 LMT. However, the amount of waste generated in both 2018-19 and 2019-20 is less than 2017-18 when 94.38 LMT of hazardous waste was generated.
Gujarat reports the highest volume of hazardous waste generated in the country. During 2019-20, 24.85 LMT i.e., around 28% of the total hazardous waste generated in the country is from Gujarat.  Maharashtra & Tamil Nadu are next with 9.99 LMT and 9.64 LMT respectively in 2019-20. During 2019-20, 12.25 lakh MT of Hazardous waste was recycled, which is lower than that of the previous year.
After a marginal growth in 2019, Bio-medical waste increased by 4.5% in 2020
As per CPCB data, an average of 647 tons of Bio-medical waste (BMW) is generated in a day during 2020. It is an increase of 4.5% compared to 2019 when an average of 619 tons of BMW was generated in a day.
The growth in BMW during 2020 is higher than that of 2019 when the increase in average per day BMW was only by 0.65%. This followed a period of increasing growth in the previous three years, where the average daily BMW increased by 3.19%, 7.9% and 10% during 2016,2017 & 2018 respectively.
Apart from the increase in the BMW generated, there is also an increase in the BMW being treated. In 2020, the bio-medical waste treated on average in a day was 577 tons a day compared to 544 tons in the earlier year.  However, there is an increasing gap in the volume of BMW generated and treated.  While the reasons for only a marginal increase in BMW during 2019 could not be ascertained, the relatively higher increase in 2020 could be due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the country. Data for 2021, could further confirm the impact of COVID-19 on the generation of BMW in India.
Gujarat & Uttar Pradesh have contributed to the higher increase in 2020, despite a fall in BMW in states like Tamil Nadu. In the same response provided in Lok Sabha, it is highlighted that CPCB has developed a COVID19BWM application for tracking the COVID-19 bio-medical waste generated.
An exponential increase in the e-Waste collected and processed in the country
The ever-increasing usage of electronic gadgets is reflected in the increase of e-waste being generated. Over the years, there has also been an improvement in the way e-waste is being collected and processed. This is reflected in the data collated by CPCB.
The trends in recent years show an exponential increase in the volume of e-waste being collected and processed. In the year 2016-17, the volume of e-waste collected & processed was 22.7 thousand tons per annum. The next year in 2017-18, it more than tripled to 69.4 thousand tons. In the following three years, while the growth rate has not been as high as in 2017-18, the volume of increase has been higher. In 2018-19, it increased by 95.2 thousand tons and in 2019-20, it increased by 59.3 thousand tons per annum. The year 2020-21 has seen the greatest increase in volume terms in the e-waste collected and processed. It increased by 1.3 lakh tons in 2020-21 to reach a total of 3.54 lakh tons of e-waste collected and processed.
As in the case with other types of wastes discussed so far, Gujarat generated the greatest amount of e-waste in 2020-21. There has been a marked increase in Gujarat in 2020-21 pushing Karnataka to the second position in terms of e-waste generation.  In one of our earlier stories on Global e-waste based on Global E-waste monitor 2020, we reported that India generates the third-highest volume of e-waste in the world.
Increase in Plastic Waste generated over the past two years
Earlier in the story, we had highlighted that there is a higher increase in plastic waste generated in India compared to other types of waste. As per data collated by CPCB, 15.89 lakh tons per annum of plastic waste was generated in 2015-16. This reduced to 1.33 lakhs per annum in 2016-17. The reported data on plastic waste further fell to 6.6 lakhs tons per annum in 2017-18 as 22 States/UTs did not report the data. Data was not available from states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Karnataka & Tamil Nadu which is reflected in the lower number in that year. The fall in 2017-18 is due to the non-reporting of data rather than an actual fall in the volume of plastic waste generated in the year. Nevertheless, the total volume of plastic waste increased to 30.59 lakh tons per annum in 2018-19 and 34.69 lakh tons in 2019-20, when almost every state-reported data.
90% collection efficiency in Solid waste in 2019-20
In 2015-16, an estimated 1.01 lakh tons of solid waste was generated per day. Out of this, around 86.5 thousand tons was collected, and 20.2 thousand tons was treated.  The collection efficiency during 2015-16 was 78.3% which improved to 89.1% in 2016-17.
The data provided by CPCB for 2017-18 is incomplete as data was not reported by some of the large states, as was the case with plastic waste. Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh are among the states that did not report data in 2017-18.
In 2018-19 for which the data is available for most of the states, an estimated 1.52 lakh tons of solid waste was generated per day out of which 1.49 lakhs was collected i.e., 91% collection efficiency. Around 55.7 tons of solid waste in a day was treated during the year. In 2019-20, while the volume of solid waste generated and collected per day fell, there is an increase in the volume of solid waste treated.
A total of 18.25 lakh tons per annum of Construction & Demolition waste was generated in 2020-21, while 19.88 thousand tons per annum is processed during the year.
Need for effective collection, treatment & recycling
Increasing human & economic activity is bound to result in the increase of many kinds of waste. While various mechanisms need to be identified & implemented to reduce the generation of waste, strategies for effective collection and processing are more important.  The increase in the volume of e-waste collected and processed, increase in the collection of solid waste, etc. point to increased efficiency in identifying waste in its collection for further processing. However, unless sound & fool-proof methods of treating, recycling, and disposing of the collected waste are properly implemented, the risk to humans & the environment at large would not reduce.
Featured Image: Hazardous Waste generated in India

created: December 14, 2021


text:
Has diversity of crops increased in states with less government procurement?
Sai Krishna Muthyanolla
January 8, 2021
One of the arguments in favour of the new farm laws is that the reduced role of APMCs & state procurement may increase the diversity of crops. But what does the data indicate about the cropping pattern in various states over the 15 years between 2004-05 and 2018-19?
It has been over a month that farmers have been protesting near Delhi against the three Farm Laws that were passed in September’2020.  While farmers across the country have joined this protest, most of the representation at the protests in Delhi has been from farmers of Punjab & Haryana along with farmers even from Rajasthan.
Arguments both in favour & against these laws are being made by multiple parties. Lack of assurance in these laws about the Minimum Support Price (MSP), reduced role of APMCs, etc., are a few of the apprehensions of the protesting farmers.
Punjab & Haryana are among the states, where the greatest procurement of Rice & Wheat is done by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) through APMCs. This is probably one of the reasons behind the larger representation of farmers from these states.
Those in support of the new farm laws argue that the reduced role of APMCs & FCI and hence dependence on MSP would result in the increased diversity of crops. The argument being that the farmers in these states largely cultivate Rice, Wheat, and few other crops with guaranteed procurement by FCI.
In this story, we take a look at the data of cropping patterns in a few states between 2004-05 and 2018-19 to analyse if there is any correlation between the abolition or reduced role of APMCs and the cropping patterns.
APMC Acts are not implemented uniformly across the states
Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (APMCs) are marketing boards established by State Governments to ensure farmers get a fair price for their produce.  The 2003 Model APMC Act, provided new guidelines regarding Agriculture Marketing. Since agriculture is a state subject, it was left to the states to legislate their own APMC law. While most of the states have enacted an APMC law, there are certain exceptions.
While few of the Northeastern States have not implemented the APMC law, Bihar & Kerala are the larger states where APMCs do not exist. Bihar has repealed the APMC act in 2006.
We take a look at a few of the States along with Bihar. The information is taken from RBI’s Handbook of Statistics on Indian States under the head “Agriculture & Allied”. 10 major categories of crops across the states have been considered for the analysis – Rice, Wheat, Pulses, Coarse grains, fruits, Vegetables, Oil Seeds, Sugarcane, Cotton & Raw Jute.
Bihar: No major change in the Area cultivated under Rice & Wheat
In 2004-05, Rice was sown in 31.2 lakh hectares and Wheat in 20.2 lakh hectares in the state of Bihar. Both these crops constituted around 65% of the total sown area (79.4 Lakh hectares) across the earlier mentioned 10 crop categories
By 2018-19, the total area under cultivation for these crops in Bihar reached 80.9 lakh hectares, a marginal increase compared to 2004-05. The highest during the period was 2007-08, with 85.4 lakh hectares.  As stated earlier, Bihar repealed the APMC Act in 2006.
The data over the period indicates that there is no major change observed in the extent of land being used for Rice and Wheat cultivation. The share of land being used for cultivation of Rice & Wheat remained around 65% in all these years with the exception of 2010-11 when the area under Rice cultivation was less than the other years.
While there is no major change in Rice & Wheat cultivation, there has been a shift in trends for other crops. The area under cultivation of pulses reduced from around 6.5 lakh hectares in 2004-05 to around 4.79 lakh hectares in 2018-19. Oil Seeds and Raw Jute also saw a reduction in the area of cultivation.
On the other hand, the area under cultivation of Sugarcane has more than doubled to 2.25 lakh hectares in 2018-19 compared to 1.04 lakh hectares in 2004-05. This increase in the cultivation of Sugarcane is observed since 2010-11.
Punjab: Increase in area under cultivation of Rice & Vegetables, decrease in the case of Coarse grains & Cotton
There has only been a marginal increase in the total area cultivated in Punjab for the aforementioned crops over the 15-year period (2004-05 to 2018-19), from 72.4 lakh hectares to 75.1 lakh hectares.
As highlighted earlier, Punjab is one of the states where the major procurement of Rice & Wheat happens through FCI and hence MSP is important for the farmers. A major portion of the land under cultivation in Punjab is for Rice & Wheat. Over this 15-year period, the proportion of land under cultivation for these two crops has also increased from around 84% to 88%. This is mainly contributed by an increase in the land under cultivation of rice, which increased from 26.4 lakh hectares in 2004-05 to 31.03 lakh hectares in 2018-19.
Along with Rice, there is an increase in the land under cultivation of Fruits & Vegetables as well. These crops seem to have been substituted for Oil Seeds & Cotton. The area under cultivation of Oilseeds has gradually dropped from 0.9 lakh hectares to 0.39 lakh hectares during this period where-as in the case of Cotton, the area under cultivation declined from 5.09 lakh hectares to 2.68 lakh hectares.
Haryana: The increase in land under cultivation can be attributed to Rice
Over the 15-year being period of 2004-05 to 2018-19, the area under cultivation for these 10 crop categories in Haryana increased from 59.3 Lakh hectares to 65.05 lakh hectares. This increase can be attributed to the increase in the land under cultivation for Rice. In 2004-05, Rice was cultivated in 10.28 lakh hectares and increased to 14.47 lakh hectares in 2018-19.
As is the case with Punjab, there is also an increase in the land under cultivation for Fruits & Vegetables. Cotton and Wheat have also seen a marginal increase in the area under cultivation.
The area under cultivation of Coarse grains & Pulses reduced substantially as is the case with Bihar and Punjab. Cotton & Sugarcane have also seen a decline in the area under cultivation.
With the available data, it is not possible to ascertain if the increase in area under rice cultivation is because of the additional area or in lieu of other crops. The proportion of area where Rice is being cultivated did increase from 17% to 22% during this period.
Maharashtra: Cultivation of Coarse Grains substituted by Cotton & Sugarcane
Maharashtra has a more equitable distribution of the area under the cultivation of different crops. Unlike the aforementioned three states, Rice & Wheat are not the major crops with a greater area under cultivation is for Pulses, Coarse grains, Oil Seeds & Cotton.
Although Maharashtra does have an APMC Act, the FCI procurement of Rice & Wheat is comparatively less. Baring few variations in between, the land under cultivation of Rice & Wheat remained nearly the same over the 15-year period.
However, a significant change can be observed in other crops. The area under cultivation of Coarse Grains has more than halved during the period. In 2004-05, it was 69.4 lakh hectares and gradually reduced to 33.2 lakh hectares in 2018-19. The sharper decline is observed during 2017-18 & 2018-19. However, the yield estimates, do not indicate any specific fall in the yield for Coarse grains.
There is also a fall in the area under cultivation of Fruits. At the same time, there is a corresponding increase in the area under cultivation of other crops – Vegetables, Oil Seeds, Cotton & Sugar. The proportionate increase of area under cultivation is more prominent in the case of Cotton & Sugarcane.
It has to be noted that unlike in the case of Haryana, there is not much variance in the total area under cultivation in Maharashtra over the 15-year period, barring a few years in between.
Madhya Pradesh: Increase in area under cultivation can be attributed to Wheat and Pulses
Madhya Pradesh is one of the states which follows a decentralized procurement (DCP) of Rice & wheat. It is among the states that have a substantial share of FCI procurement of Rice & Wheat. This is reflected in the larger under cultivation of these two crops. However, apart from these two crops, the state also has a proportionately higher area under the cultivation of Pulses & Oil Seeds along with Coarse Grains.
Over the 15-year period, a substantial increase is observed in the area under cultivation of Wheat, Pulses, Rice & Oil Seeds without a reduction in the area under cultivation of other crops. This was possible because of the increase in the overall area under cultivation.
No Definitive correlation between State Procurement (APMC) & Diversity of Crops
Analysis of data for these select states does not indicate any definitive correlation between state procurement (APMCs) and diversity of crops in the respective states i.e. the argument that state procurement (APMCs) hinders diversification of cropping pattern does not appear to be true, at least in these states.
Bihar, which has done away with the APMC act has not witnessed any substantial increase in the area under cultivation of crops other than Rice & Wheat. The increase in area under cultivation of Rice & Wheat in Punjab did not hinder the increase in area under cultivation of other crops, although there is a fall in the land under cultivation for Coarse grains. However, this trend is observed in other states as well, especially in the case of Maharashtra where there is a fall in the area under cultivation of Coarse grains. In Maharashtra, there seems to be a preference for cash crops like Cotton & Sugarcane.
Meanwhile, data for Madhya Pradesh indicates that the area under cultivation of various crops has increased because of the increase in overall area under cultivation. In a few of the other states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Odisha, and other southern states, there seems to be a specific preference for crops like Rice, Wheat, Coarse Grains, Pulses, etc.
The data from these states indicate that crop diversity is not necessarily dependent on APMCs or state procurement through MSP of specific crops.
Featured Image: Diversity of crops

created: January 8, 2021