Abstract 

Social development is expected to promote holistic improvement of individuals, institutions and their surrounding environments. Looking at the pace of development in India, the economy of most states requires strategic prioritization to accelerate improved well-being of the people. Accessibility to health, school education and public security are critical to the edifice of social development. Social development is primarily contingent upon the protection of fundamental rights, accountability, gender equality, geriatrics care and social inclusion, embedded in human development ventures. UN’s Human Development Index (HDI) evaluates the health of social development based on education, health and per capita income. UN’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the majority of Sustainable Development Goals prioritize human development outcomes by focusing on health, nutrition, education and women empowerment as major elements. The fact that India with its unmanageable fertility behaviour and diverse socio-economic landscape, faces acute challenges in promoting upward social mobility. It comes from the common counter that in the absence of state capacities, essential service delivery passes through critical gaps. The paper argues that scaling up state capacities is crucial for effective social development in India and a capabilities-driven approach can help achieve this goal. The paper explores the human capabilities approach, investing in total factor productivity, life expectancy, healthcare, scaling up state capacities, institutional reforms, capacity building and resource allocation.

Introduction

Social development and state effectiveness are interconnected concepts that are important in achieving citizens’ well-being. Development refers to creating a society that is just, equitable and prosperous where individuals have access to resources, opportunities and services that enable them to use their full potential. Side by side, state effectiveness refers to the capacity of state to perform its functions, deliver public goods and services, and also respond to the needs of its citizens. Social development is essential for reducing poverty, inequality and social exclusion. State effectiveness is critical for ascertaining efficient and effective use of public resources. This is particularly relevant in delivering essential services, viz. healthcare, education, and infrastructure. Moreover, social development and state effectiveness mutually complement each-other. Effective state is necessary for achieving social development and social development is crucial in building an effective state. 

Social development has been illustrated as an ‘expression for individuals’ motivation in a system of social relations’ (McGuire, C and Robert J Havighurst: 1947: 345), ‘development of people, institutions and their environment (Paiva, JFX: 1977:327), and ‘eradication of deprivation, improvement in capabilities and the quality of life of ordinary people (Sen, A.: 1996: 26)’. Keeping in view the aforesaid prescriptions, social development envisaged in the policy documents and translated into various interventions has not done much in scaling up the socio-economic conditions of the citizens. Theoretically, social development delineates the postulates of progress by following two paths viz. ‘development in infrastructure and scaling up of social welfare interventions’1. ‘The development in infrastructure is generally associated with a rightist approach whereas scaling up of social welfare, leftist. In fact, social development posits the urgent need for balanced social policies that can foster development by combining both rightist and leftist approaches aptly. The development must address the multifaceted changes brought about by both natural and human-made influences’2. By focusing on these areas, the paper seeks to provide insights into creating a more balanced and sustainable approach to development that not only promotes economic growth but also boosts social well-being.

Importantly, the pace of social development in India is uneven, reflecting significant disparities across various regions and communities. Though economic development, as a crucial component of social progress, has reached different sections of society, it has benefited people of different strata differently. The data points on the above components are skewed that indicate additional imperatives for social inclusion. This disparity in development can be attributed to the varying effectiveness and implementation of state-led policies. While most states theoretically have access to similar resources, the way these resources are allocated and utilized differs greatly. This variation in resource allocation vis-à-vis expenditure pattern is influenced by each state's unique taxation policies and the relationship between the government and its citizens. It is worth mentioning that different states exhibit distinct expenditure patterns based on their vision, priorities and administrative capabilities. These patterns are often shaped by the states' fiscal policies, including how they generate revenue through taxation. States with more efficient tax systems and higher revenue generation capacities can invest more in social development projects such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure. Furthermore, the association between the citizens and the system of governance plays a crucial role in how development policies are implemented. In states where there is a stronger engagement and trust between the government and the people, policies tend to be more effectively executed. Citizens in such states are more likely to comply with regulations, contribute to the tax base and participate in development programmes, leading to better outcomes.

However, in the states where the relationship between the government and citizens is strained, policy implementation often faces hurdles. Distrust in governance can lead to lower tax compliance, reduced public participation in development initiatives and general apathy towards government programmes. This results in inefficient use of resources and hinders overall social and economic development. In this context, the strategies that can help manage social development through the available resource base need to be articulated. The scarce resources are required to be used efficiently so that inclusiveness can be attained. This would provide surplus benefits to the vulnerable, destitute, Divyangjans etc. The coverage of such people under the Social Security Shield (SSS) can develop confidence that can further be tapped to productivity by engaging the lot in opportunities. 

Indeed, states allocating resources for public welfare often do not adequately consider the developmental outcomes of such expenditures. Resources are typically distributed among various sectors without a thorough evaluation of their field-based performance. The lack of insight into ground-level reality means that expenditure does not always translate into meaningful development outcomes. For the advancement of people, a systematic and hierarchical approach is essential. This journey must begin at the village level and progress to Gram Panchayats, Blocks, Districts, and States, contributing to aspirational development targets. The outcomes at these micro levels must be closely examined to understand and achieve desired macro-level outcomes and objectives across the nation.

Village-level development should be prioritized as it forms the foundation of imperatively coordinated associations. By focusing on development at the village level, states can ensure that the benefits of public welfare programmes and resource allocations directly impact the lives of individuals at the grassroots. This requires a detailed and systematic approach where insights from field-based performance need to be integrated into the planning and implementation processes. This convincingly begins with the corrective measures for fast grip of interventions. 

To achieve this, states should adopt a bottom-up approach, where feedback and data from village-level initiatives inform higher-level policy decisions. Regular monitoring and evaluation of outcomes at the village, Gram Panchayat, Block, and District levels can provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of various schemes. Interestingly, the data-driven approach can help in refining strategies and reallocating resources where necessary development initiatives are both effective and equitable. This requires collaboration between various tiers of governance, ensuring that policies and programmes are not only well-designed but also well-implemented. Empowering local bodies, such as Gram Panchayats, with the necessary resources and autonomy can play a crucial role in transforming social development in India. Convergence, collaboration and compatibility (CCC) can help address these gaps effectively. 

Human Capabilities Approach 

The human capabilities approach developed by Amartya Sen emphasizes enhancing human capabilities and freedoms to achieve development. The ‘Capabilities and freedoms to achieve development’ approach focuses on expanding people’s choices and opportunities to lead fulfilling lives.  The major attributes of the approach include education, health care, livelihood, political participation and social inclusion. In this model, education is about access to quality education and learning opportunities. Healthcare is about access to quality health services.  Livelihood is about access to economic opportunities and resources. Political participation is about the ability to participate in political processes and decision-making. Finally, social inclusion is the ability to participate in social and cultural activities. As such, the human capabilities approach recognizes that development is about more than just economic growth. It is about creating an environment where people can thrive and reach their full potential. In India, there are significant disparities in human capabilities, particularly in education and healthcare. Addressing these disparities is crucial for transforming development. However, by applying indicators of human capabilities, the persistent gaps can be identified particularly poverty, inequality and social exclusion.  In this context, HDI score, life expectancy, years of schooling and GNI per capita are instrumental. From the year 2010 to 2020, quantitative values against the indicators have been obtained. The details are summarized as under:

Table 1: Human Development Index (HDI) In India

i. United Nations Development Programme (2020). Human Development Index (HDI).

ii. World Health Organization (2020). Life Expectancy at Birth.

iii. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2020). Expected Years of Schooling.

iv. World Bank (2020). Gross National Income (GNI) per Capita.

The tabular information reveals that over the years HDI score for India has grown. In 2010, it was 0.554 which went to 0.624 in 2015 and 0.645 in 2020. A similar increase in life expectancy is also evident. It was 65.8 years in 2010, went to 68.3 in 2015 and 70.5 in 2020. The years of schooling were 10.3 in 2010 which went to 11.7 in 2015 and 12.3 in 2020. The gross national income (GNI) per capita was Rs. 3469 in 2010 that figured Rs. 5663 in 2015 and Rs. 6427 in 2020. Overall, the maximum positive change has been found in GNI per capita (85.26%), followed by HDI (16.4%), years of schooling (19.4%) and life expectancy (7.14%). Though positive changes are evident, the capabilities deprivation is still prevalent. The information garnered on the five components of capabilities deprivation has been shown through the line diagram plotted below: 

Figure 1: Capability Deprivation of Indian Population

i. National Sample Survey Office (2019). Education in India.

ii. National Family Health Survey (2019-20). Healthcare in India.

iii. International Labour Organization (2020). Employment and Livelihood in India.

iv. Election Commission of India (2020). Voter Turnout in India.

v. World Bank (2020). Social Inclusion in India.

The line diagram drawn above shows the capability deprivation percentage of India’s population. The line diagram has been drawn keeping in view five components, namely education, health care, livelihood capabilities, political participation and social inclusion. It shows that maximum deprivation has resulted in livelihood capabilities (43.2%), followed by social inclusion (35.4%), health care (30.8%), education (25.6%) and political participation (20.1%). Livelihood is required to be prioritized so that social and economic empowerment can be improved. Through different initiatives of Government of India, livelihood opportunities have been created. The process of livelihood generation requires additional momentum to improve the socio-economic status of the citizens. The sponsored mobility to socially underprivileged and vulnerable needs to be prioritized to catalyze inclusive development. However, the extension of such protections needs to be monitored by the state agencies effectively. 

Total Factor Productivity (TFP) for Transforming Development 

The Total Factor Productivity (TFP) measures the residual growth in output that cannot be described by the growth in input such as labour and capital. The TFP represents the efficiency with which inputs are converted into output. ‘India’s TFP growth has been sluggish, averaging around 1% per annum between 2000 and 2017’3. According to an estimate by the World Bank (2020), India’s TFP growth has been lower than China's (2.5%), and Vietnam's (3.3%). ‘Investing in human capital like education and health care can enhance TFP by improving labour productivity’4. ‘Upgrading physical infrastructure like transport, energy and communication can also boost TFP by reducing transaction costs and improving connectivity’5. ‘Promoting research, development (R&D) and innovation can drive TFP growth by introducing new technologies and processes.’6 

It is estimated that investing in TFP can have positive spillover effects on social development outcomes such as poverty reduction, education and healthcare. By increasing productivity and efficiency, TFP growth can lead to higher incomes and reduced poverty. As such, economic growth enables human development and human development itself contributes to economic growth. Better income and improved productivity can lead to better health outcomes. The rationalizing of TFP requires proper monitoring and assessment to have a sense of outcomes.  The investment needs to be gauged and augmented keeping in view the score obtained on the outcome indicators.  

Life Expectancy and Healthcare 

Life expectancy is one of the central indicators of social development. Healthcare is a vital component in improving human capabilities. Life expectancy reflects the health and well-being of the population. Though considerable progress has been made over the years, the issue of quality, accessibility and preventive care requires special attention from policymakers and executors. Accessibility and affordability are the major concerns in healthcare.  Through robust healthcare systems, effective public health initiatives and equitable social policies, it is possible to continue improving life expectancy and ensure a healthier future for all. There are several centrally sponsored and state driven healthcare schemes in existence. The awareness about healthcare and healthcare schemes needs to be mainstreamed in the broader framework of relevance and operations. India faces significant challenges in healthcare, including inadequate access, quality and equity components.

Table 2: Life expectancy7 and health care

The life expectancy in the last 10 years has been placed in the Table above. It shows a gradual increase from the years 2010 to 2020. However, a healthy population with higher life expectancy may contribute to economic activities, thereby raising the well-being of public at large. 

Table 3: Health Care Indicators

i. National Family Health Survey (2019-20). Access to Healthcare.

ii. World Health Organization (2020). Healthcare Quality Index.

iii. World Bank (2020). Healthcare Expenditure. 

Table 3 provides crucial data on healthcare access, healthcare quality index, and healthcare expenditure as a percentage of GDP. It shows that access to healthcare stands at 75.6 per cent, while the healthcare quality index is at 60.3. Healthcare expenditure as a percentage of GDP is at 3.5 per cent.

Given the current metrics, it is clear that increasing healthcare expenditure relative to GDP is essential. An elevated investment in healthcare will not only improve the quality of like and extend longevity but also enhance overall public health outcomes. By raising the expenditure, states can better harness their potential and build greater trust and confidence among their populations. Enhanced outcome oriented funding will facilitate improved healthcare services, ultimately leading to a healthier and more resilient society.

Scaling up state capacities 

Increasing the capacities of the states is important for effective social development in India. This includes strengthening institutional frameworks, enhancing human and improving financial resources. Social and economic institutions are required to ensure harmonious development. Institutional strengthening requires leadership-based governance, effective policy frameworks, coordination mechanisms, training and capacity building, attracting skilled professionals and performance management. Side by side, human resource management, financial resource management, data and evidence-based policymaking, infrastructure and technological development, community engagement and participation are of utmost importance. Empowering local governments to manage and implement social development programmes should be tailored to their specific needs. Public-private partnership (PPP), international cooperation, innovation and technology integration can contribute a lot to it. 

Conclusion 

Scaling up state capacities is crucial for effective social development in India. This requires a multifaceted approach that addresses human capabilities, institutional frameworks, resource allocation and their efficient use. By prioritizing investments in human capital, infrastructure and social services, the states’ capacities can be enhanced to align with sustainable development goals and National Development Plans.

To further strengthen it, it is imperative to prioritize human capital, particularly in education and health care. To strengthen the institutional framework, including governance, accountability and transparency, appropriate and tailored capacity-building programmes are required for the state functionaries. The allocation of financial resources in line with outcome indicators would provide evidence based idea to rationalise the investment pattern. Fostering partnerships among government, civil society organisations and private sector may leverage resources and expertise, producing optimum outcomes on the tangent of development. This strategic focus will help us navigate the challenges and opportunities on the path to a developed and inclusive India. Indeed, India’s transformation into Shresthha Bharat would be achieved by adopting a concerted approach where state functionaries work together, share their successes and learn from each other, drive towards collective growth and development.  

Endnotes

1. Muralidharan, K. (2024). Accelerating India’s Development. Gurugram: Penguin Random House India, pp. 301-323. 

2. Ibid.

3. World Bank. (2020). World development Indicators. 

4. UNESCO. (2019). Global Education Monitoring Report. 

5. World Bank. (2020). World development Indicators.

6. OECD. (2020). Innovation and Productivity. 

7. National Family Health Survey. (2019-20). Healthcare in India.

References 

1. Dincecco, M. (2017). State Capacity and Economic Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

2. Kumar, A. (2018). Indian Economy: A Critical Analysis. New Delhi: Routledge. McGUIRE, C. & Robert J. Havighurst (1947). Social Development. Review of Educational Research, 17 (5), 345-353, American Educational Research Association.

3. Lipset, S. M. (1959). The Political Man: The Social Base of Politics. New York: D &C Inc.

4. Mukherjee, M. & Ray, A. K. (1977). A Method of Combining Diverse Partial Measure of Development. The Journal of Income & Wealth, 2(1).   

5. Paiva, JEX. (1977). A Conception of Social Development. Social Service Review, 51 (2), 327-336, The University of Chicago Press. 

6. Sen, A. (1996). Radical needs and Moderate Reforms. In J. Dreze & A. Sen (eds), Indian Development-Selected Regional Perspectives, New Delhi: Oxford India. 

7. Wolins, M. (1967). The Objectives of Social Welfare. New Perspectives, Spring.