Recommends eight policy priorities for lagging states in India to achieve the SDGs

1. Achieving the Sustainable
Development Goals in India:
Ensuring no state falls behind
Shiladitya Chatterjee
99th Annual Conference of Indian Economic Association,
Tirupati, 27-29 December 2016
1

2. Contents of Presentation
I. Introduction to the SDGs
II. India’s performance on the MDGs and its lessons for the SDGs
III. Eight policy priorities for lagging states
2

3. The SDGs: Three pillars - economic, social and
environmental
GOAL 1.End poverty in all its forms everywhere
GOAL 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
GOAL 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
GOAL 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
GOAL 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
GOAL 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
GOAL 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
GOAL 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent
work for all
GOAL 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
GOAL 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
GOAL 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
GOAL 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
GOAL 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
GOAL 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
GOAL 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat
desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
GOAL 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and
build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
GOAL 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable
development
3

4. India’s final performance on the MDGs was
mixed
4
Source: S. Chatterjee, N.Kumar, M. Hammill and S. Panda (2016) [see References Slide 19]

5. Many states fell behind on the MDGs – this has to
be avoided for the SDGs
0.813
0.790
0.736
0.719
0.694
0.659 0.658 0.650
0.627 0.626 0.616 0.609 0.603 0.592 0.585 0.584 0.577 0.565
0.530
0.506
0.466 0.464
0.452 0.451
0.426
0.398 0.396
0.342
0.313
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
Final ranking of states by MDG performance
Median
5
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)

6. 5 Main factors responsible for poor performance
on MDGs – these are relevant for SDGs as well
• Lack of growth
• Insufficient prioritization of resources for human development
• Inefficient use of resources – poor service delivery
• Lack of basic infrastructure
• Lack of gender empowerment
6

7. Growth and MDG Performance
AP
BR
CG
GA
GJ
HR
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
OR
PB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
AR
AS
HP
JK
MN
ML
NL
SK
TR
UK
y = 0.046x + 0.34
R² = 0.29
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0
MDGPerformanceIndex
Per Capita NSDP Average Growth Rate (1993-94 to 2012-13, constant prices)
7
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)

8. More priority to human development yielded better
outcomes – Example: investments in public health
infrastructure and health outcomes
KL
KA
MH
TN
HP APJK
PBGJ
OR HR
AS
CGWB
RJ MP
JH
BR
UP
y = -0.01x + 64.86
R² = 0.51
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
HealthOutcomeIndex
Persons per government hospital bed
8
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)

9. Efficiency of public services delivery (proxy MNREGA
performance) and overall MDG performance
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
y = 0.0005x + 0.4449
R² = 0.3743
0.25
0.35
0.45
0.55
0.65
0.75
0.85
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
MDGPerformanceIndex
Proportion of rural households provided work as proportion of rural poor households (%)
Performance of states on MNREGA 2012-13 and the
MDG Performance Index
9
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)

10. Basic infrastructure crucial for MDGs – example:
access to roads and attendance at births
AP
AS
BR
CG
GJ
HR
JK
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
OR
PB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
R² = 0.5814
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
105
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Proportion of births
attended by skilled
health personnel
Kilometres of roads per 10,000 population
10
Source: S. Chatterjee et. al. (2016)

11. Dilemma of lagging states - daunting SDG challenges
with large resource gaps for meeting them: example -
Assam School Education Sector
Resource requirements and gaps (Rs. ‘000 crores)
2016-2019 2019-2022 2022-2025 2025-2028 2028-2030
Total budget requirement 68.4 55.4 58.0 60.9 47.5
Resource gap 23.5 18.9 21.0 23.2 18.5
Selected school education indicators of Assam
Baseline
2016-17
Target
2019-20
Target
2023-24
Target
2030-31
Net Enrol. Rate (Upper Primary) 67.54 72.54 100.00 100.0
Learning outcomes (Upper Primary)
L-I
Math
Science
53.0
61.0
51.0
65.0
57.0
60.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Net Enrol. Rate (Secondary) 53.5 66.3 76.3 100.0
Learning outcomes (Secondary)
NAS 2015 Score (core subjects)
38.0 55.0 100.0 100.0
11
Source: Department of Education, Government of Assam. Preliminary estimates in draft Strategy Paper & Action Plan

12. Policy options of lagging states for catching up
on SDGs
1. Focus on all of these constraints which affected MDG performance
as they will also be relevant for SDGs
—However, many of these will take time to be achieved (e.g. growth, basic
infrastructure, women’s development etc.)
—What then are their policy options, in the medium term?
12

13. Possible state strategies for the medium term
2. Maximize efforts at
revenue augmentation
3. Prioritize expenditures
towards SDGs
—Develop outcome focused
budgets based on SDG
outcomes
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Karnataka
TN
Kerala
MP
Andhra
Chattisgarh
Punjab
UP
All
Maharashtra
Gujarat
Goa
Haryana
J&K
Rajasthan
Himachal
Orissa
Assam
Uttarakhand
Bihar
Jharkhand
WB
Meghalaya
Tripura
Sikkim
Manipur
Arunachal
Mizoram
Nagaland
Ranking of states by own tax revenue as percent of Gross
State Domestic Product
(Average 2009-14)
13
Source: Planning Commission Data Tables

14. Possible state strategies for the medium term
4. Tackle inefficiencies in service delivery
— Through knowledge of and adopting good practices
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE],
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE][CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
[CELLRANGE]
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Literacy2011
Per pupil public expenditure in elementary education (Rupees thousand) 2009-10
Spending on elementary education and literacy outcome
14
Source: Ministry of Human Resources Development

15. Possible state strategies for the medium term
5. Introduce policy,
organizational and
institutional changes
• Outcome focus rather than
sector focus
—Requires new coordination
arrangements
• Paying heed to cross-
cutting/thematic concerns
—Effective decentralization of
service delivery
—Heeding needs of poor,
women, deprived groups
—Encouraging participation
• Private sector
• Communities, civil society
15

16. Possible state strategies for the medium term
6. Foster innovation
—Example: use of ICT for telemedicine; virtual classrooms etc.
7. Expand partnerships
—With private sector
• Through better use of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) funds
—Communities and civil society
16

17. Central Government support will also be critical
for lagging states
8. Actively seek support from national level
• There is strong rationale for Central Government role
—Unanimous commitment by all countries – including India - in the United
Nations to achieving SDGs by 2030
• This implies responsibility of Centre to support states achieve SDGs also
—SDG Goal 10: Reduce inequality between and within countries
• Inequality between states’ SDG achievements needs to be eliminated too
17

18. Several instruments exist at National level to
assist lagging states
1. Support lagging states through Centrally Sponsored Schemes and
Missions in critical SDG areas
—Similar to national missions in the MDG period such as NHM which proved quite
successful
2. Finance Commission should consider equalizing SDG achievements in
deciding allocation formula
3. More Central allocation of borrowings from international development
institutions (e.g. ADB, BRICS Bank, AIB, WB etc.) for lagging states
4. Central policy incentives for greater private sector participation in
lagging states
5. Central support in capacity development for lagging states
—Statistical capacity
—Knowledge and good practices
18

19. References
1. Shiladitya Chatterjee, Matthew Hammill, Nagesh Kumar and Swayamsiddha Panda. An Assessment
of India’s Aggregative and Comparative States’ Performance on the Millennium Development Goals
and Identification of Key Drivers of Inter-State Variations. Indian Economic Journal 64 (1&2) 2016.
2. Shiladitya Chatterjee, Matthew Hammill, Nagesh Kumar and Swayamsiddha Panda. Assessing India’s
Progress in Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Key Drivers of Inter-State Variations.
Development Papers 1502. ESCAP South and Southwest Asia Office, New Delhi. Sept. 2015.
3. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Achieving the MDGs in the Least Developed Countries of Asia and the Pacific:
Importance of Cross-sectoral and Cross-thematic Impacts. United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok. 2015. (Report prepared for UN-ESCAP)
4. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Achieving the MDGs in the Least Developed Countries of Asia and the Pacific:
Policies to Improve Cross-sectoral and Cross-thematic Synergies. United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Bangkok. 2015. (Report prepared for UN-ESCAP).
5. Shiladitya Chatterjee. Roadmap for Implementing the 2030 Agenda in the Asia-Pacific Region: Sub
Regional Study for South and Southwest Asia, 2016. (Paper prepared for Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok).
19

20. Thank You
shilochatterjee@gmail.com
20