Vivek's Commentary

The debate surrounding whether coalition or single-party governments are more conducive to economic growth is significant, particularly in a diverse country like India where regional interests and political diversity hold sway. Examining the performance of both types of governments through the lens of economic growth, as indicated by GDP and per capita GDP growth rates, provides valuable insights into their respective effectiveness. General Trends in Seat Share and Growth Rates:  The correlation between the seat share of the largest party in the Lok Sabha and economic growth rates reveals intriguing patterns. Notably, as the dominance of a single party increases, there tends to be a decline in both GDP and per capita GDP growth rates. This suggests that when power is concentrated in one party, economic growth may suffer. Conversely, optimal growth rates are observed when the largest party’s seat share falls within the range of 20% to 40%, typically associated with coalition governments

“Proportional representation is not suited to the form of government which this Constitution lays down….in the House where there is a Parliamentary system of government, you must necessarily have a party which is in majority and which is prepared to support the government. One of the disadvantages of proportional representation is the fragmentation of the legislature into a number of small groups. Proportional representation would not permit a stable government to remain in office, because Parliament would be so divided into so many small groups that every time anything happened which displeased certain groups in Parliament, they would, on that occasion, withdraw their support from the Government, with the result that the Government losing the support of certain groups and units, would fall to pieces. Our future government must do one thing, namely, it must maintain a stable government and maintain law and order.”  (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly Debate on 4th January 19

The economic performance of large states in India compared to China's provinces reveals a paradox in development and governance efficiency. While China's centralized governance system promotes economic growth in its larger regions, India's larger states encounter various obstacles that hinder their progress. Conversely, under India's decentralization, smaller states have experienced significant economic growth. However, the slower progress of India's larger states restricts the nation's overall economic growth. This suggests a need to understand the dynamics of two different governance systems: the performance of smaller states under a centralized system and that of larger states under a decentralized system. From the mobility graph, it is evident that large states in India are trailing behind China's largest province, while the smaller states in India are performing well. In fact, in the initial period, the smaller states of India have a higher average per

The recent state assembly elections in India provides a deep insight into the evolving political landscape particularly about First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system. Under the FPTP system, the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins the election which can fail to translate popular votes into proportional representation, resulting in votes that don't always carry the weight they should. This discrepancy arises due to the winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate with the most votes in a particular constituency win, irrespective of whether they secure an absolute majority or not. As a consequence, a candidate can win a seat by only having a plurality of votes (more than any other single candidate but not necessarily a majority of all votes cast), while the votes cast for other candidates essentially go unrepresented. This leads to a scenario where a significant portion of the population might not see their voices reflected in the government they get, creating w

Mumbai, the financial capital of India, is a city of stark contradictions. On one hand, it boasts the highest per capita Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) in the country, and its municipal corporation ranks among the wealthiest in terms of revenue. Yet, paradoxically, Mumbai, Mumbai Suburban District, as well as the neighboring districts of Thane and Palghar, grapple with a severe crisis of malnutrition, affecting the most vulnerable members of its population, particularly children. In this article, we delve into this puzzling contradiction, exploring the reasons behind this alarming situation and potential solutions. Figure 1: Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) Source: Author's calculations are based on NFHS-4 and NFHS-5 data. Palghar district was established in 2014, following a partition from Thane district. Consequently, for the 2015-16 period, Palghar is considered as an integral part of Thane district. Please note that the use of red color is consistent with the formation of four

Economists advocating for economic growth put forth two crucial arguments. First, they posit that growth possesses a trickle-down mechanism whereby even if the benefits of growth initially accrue to the upper echelons of income, they ultimately extend to the impoverished segments of society. Second, in instances where this trickle-down process fails to materialize, the surplus generated from economic growth can be equitably reallocated through welfare initiatives. An exemplar of such a welfare scheme is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which was enacted in 2006. During this period, India experienced a period of robust economic expansion. However, this prompts the question of whether the government should solely target a specific income threshold. In the 2000s, the governmental objectives were not confined to attaining a predetermined income level but were instead oriented towards cultivating sustainable and balanced economic growth that concurrent