Most Affordable IAS Coaching in India  

14 Aug 2024 : The Indian Express

Editorial 1 : A caveat in the jobs data

Context: KLEMS data released by RBI in July 2024.

 

Introduction: Studies based on the KLEMS data are being widely quoted to counter claims of poor job creation in the country. Hence, it is necessary that we examine the methodology of generating the data, going into sectoral details and original sources.

 

About KLEMS database

  • The KLEMS database consisting of data on capital (K), labour (L), energy (E), material (M) and services (S), currently available for the period 1980 to 2024, is meant to provide a measurement tool to monitor and evaluate productivity growth at the industry level as well as the aggregate economy.
  • It uses data from different rounds of the employment-unemployment surveys (EUS), the periodic labour force surveys (PLFS), the National Account Statistics and the Annual Survey of Industries. 

 

Paucity of quality data

  • In the absence of yearly data from the National Statistical Office, the available data are used as benchmarks and interpolated for other years.
  • Since the surveys do not provide the absolute number of workers, the estimated worker-population ratios (WPR) for the four groups (rural male, rural female, urban male, urban female) from the survey (EUS and PLFS) are multiplied by the total population.
  • Population for the survey years is either interpolated using Census numbers or taken from the population projections of the National Population Commission under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW).

 

Methodology

  • for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20, the all-India figures for the employed persons are taken from the Economic Survey 2021-22.
  • For 2020-21 onwards, population projections by the MoHFW are used. 
  • These projections are available for males and females only, and consequently, a uniform growth is applied for projecting populations in rural and urban segments.
  • The worker numbers are then distributed among the industry groups, considered in KLEMS, according to their shares in employment as in PLFS.

 

Issues with the obtained data

  • The population figures projected by MoHFW are on the higher side due to a sharp decline in fertility rate during the period from 2010 to 2020.
  • This implies that the total labour and workforce, obtained through the multiplication of the projected population with the WPR, would be overestimated.
  • A large majority of workers are engaged as unpaid family workers.
  • Using EUS/PLFS data along with the projected population to claim employment generation would thus be misleading, without any reference to the nature and quality of work.

 

What the numbers reveal?

  • In the KLEMS database, employment in agriculture increased from a near stagnant 20 crore before 2018-19 to 25 crore in 2022-23. 
  • The service sector employment went up from 17.2 crore to 20.2 crore.
  • Manufacturing employment grew from 5.5 crore to 6.3 crore.
  • The number of workers would go up systematically due to the population increase and the methodology of projection even when the WPR remains the same.

 

SBI’s Comparative Study

  • SBI compared the projected total employment based on the Annual Survey of Unincorporated Sector Enterprises (ASUSE) data with the numbers available in the RBI KLEMS database.
  • ASUSE
    • The ASUSE survey covers a subset of all unorganised enterprises and excludes those in construction, the corporate sector and government, besides those registered as factories and cooperatives. 

 

Methodological Limitations – Conclusion

  • Employment in enterprise surveys indicates a position in the enterprises. It is not easily relatable to information on individuals, collected in household employment surveys, that are considered superior for employment data.
  • Data on the registration of MSME units in the Udyam portal usually does not imply new job creation, nor do the monthly changes in EPFO subscription mean additional employment generation.
  • The methodological limitations in all these employment related data leads to confusion and claims of rapid growth of employment which might not be the reality.

Editorial 2 : A Port of no return

Context: Development of Great Nicobar port.

 

Great Nicobar Port: From no-go zone to permitted

  • Two related aspects at the heart of the matter
    • A category of land labelled by Indian law as coastal regulation zone (CRZ)-1A 
    • the environmental clearance granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to a Rs 42,000 crore transshipment port in Great Nicobar Island’s Galathea Bay. 
  • Coastal areas that are notified as protected areas (wildlife sanctuary and national park), with mangroves, corals, turtle-nesting beaches, sea grass beds and nesting grounds of birds among others, are included in CRZ-1A.
  • They are out of bounds for large construction projects such as the port in question in Great Nicobar Island.

 

Ecological Significance of Galathea Bay

  • The beach at Galathea Bay, is one of the most significant nesting sites in the Indian Ocean of the giant leatherback, the world’s largest sea turtle.
  • In addition to giant leatherback turtle, three other turtle species also nest here.
  • The project site also has coral colonies and mangroves as mentioned in the project’s environment impact assessment report.
  • The adjoining coastal forests have important nesting sites of the endemic Nicobar megapode.
  • To conserve this richness and diversity Galathea Bay was proposed in 1997 as a wildlife sanctuary over 11 km2 of sea, coast and coastal forest. 


Road to Port

  • Gradually a path was cleared for the port.
    • De-notifying the sanctuary in January 2021 even though the turtles continue nesting here.
    • MoEFCC’s environment appraisal committee (EAC) recommended the project for clearance and the MoEFCC cleared the project in November 2022. 
    • This was challenged in the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which appointed a high-powered committee (HPC) headed by the Secretary, MoEFCC, with a key member being the Chief Secretary (CS), A&N Islands, to look into the matter. 
  • The problem remained unresolved because the project site was still CRZ-1A based on scientific records, in reports of the Andaman and Nicobar Coastal Zone Management Authority and the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM).
  • A port could not be allowed and a solution was needed.

 

NCSCM Survey and Report – The Workaround

  • The HPC came to the conclusion that in the Report submitted by the NCSCM, it has been determined that construction of port is permissible in CRZ-IB area but not permissible in CRZ-IA.
  • Therefore, NCSCM concluded that no part of the project area is falling under CRZ-1A.

 

Conclusion – A let down for Ecology

  • The turtles still nest here, the mangroves still stand, the megapodes still forage and breed here and 20,688 coral colonies still flourish in the adjoining waters. This is still CRZ-1A, but now that the port has been approved, this cannot be IA.
  • Examples like this put the focus on evergreen debate of ‘Ecology vs Economy’.