Whichever way one looks at the key indicators of
employment and unemployment released by the National Sample Survey
Office (NSSO) recently, there is nothing much to crow about in
inferences that can be drawn from the data collected in the 68th round
of survey conducted during the period July 2011 to June 2012.
Coming
as it does ahead of the Lok Sabha polls in 2014 — and the detailed
reports of the sample survey are likely to be available when the
elections are round the corner — the Congress-led United Progressive
Alliance (UPA) may well go to town highlighting the marked increase in
the number of jobs created in its second term. The fact that nearly 14
million jobs were created in two years till January 2012 may be
interpreted as a remarkable achievement, more so when the sharp increase
in additional jobs came about at a time when the Indian economy was
experiencing a downturn with the GDP growth slipping from 9.3 per cent
in 2010-11 to 6.2 per cent in 2011-12.
But when
juxtaposed with the fact that the UPA government, which has been
swearing by its motto of inclusive growth and job creation, saw the
creation of a mere one million additional jobs during its five-year
tenure from 2004-05 to 2009-10, it exposes itself to the Opposition flak
of jobless growth. Especially so when the BJP-led regime of the
National Democratic Alliance (NDA) which sought to hail its five-year
stint as ‘India shining’ — another matter that the slogan bombed at the
hustings — actually added over 60 million jobs.
So,
instead of starting a competitive debate to score brownie points on who
did what — as has been witnessed many times earlier on GDP growth rate
comparisons — it is high time that political parties indulge in the more
constructive and serious business of taking the economy on a higher
growth path and quality job creation to meet the aspirations of the
educated youth while providing gainful employment opportunities to the
rural folks.
In fact, the NSSO indicators are aimed
at doing just that. While releasing the survey pointers on June 20, the
Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation said: “The detailed
results of surveys on employment and unemployment are usually brought
out by the NSSO through a number of reports. In order to make available
the salient results of the surveys, well in advance of the release of
its reports, for use in planning, policy formulation, decision support,
and as input for further statistical exercises, the NSSO has released
the key indicators.”
Be that as it may, the survey
indicators, based on the central sample of 1,01,724 households (59,700
in rural areas and 42,024 in urban areas) surveyed from 7,469 villages
in rural areas and 5,268 urban blocks spread over all the States and
Union Territories, has thrown up a slew of disconcerting facts.
First,
what was the type of 13.9 million jobs added in two years (that ended
on June 30, 2012) especially at a time of growth deceleration? How is it
that alongside, the overall rate of unemployment during the period also
rose and was more pronounced among women? If only primary work is taken
into account, the unemployment rate went up from 2.5 per cent, or 9.2
million jobless persons in 2010, to 3.7 per cent, or 10.4 million in
2012.
In the unemployed male category, the percentage
rose from 2.2 to 3.4, while among women, the percentage was higher at
3.7 in 2012 as against 3.3 in 2010.
In the second
category, which includes other work apart from the primary area of
employment, the jobless rate for men went up marginally from two per
cent in 2010 to 2.1 per cent in 2012, while for women it was 2.3 per
cent and 3.4 per cent, respectively. Ostensibly, this category includes
work under the national rural employment guarantee programme, which also
goes on to reflect the quality of casual work on offer.
As
if the fall in the labour force participation rate (LFPR) is not
worrying enough, another disconcerting datum is the fall in this
indicator among women. Perhaps owing to shrinking job opportunities at
certain levels of education and consequent longer study periods for
achieving higher qualification, or simply opting out of the job market,
the LFPR fell from 40 per cent in 2009-10 to 39.5 per cent in 2011-12,
with that for males at nearly 56 per cent and for females at 23 per cent
. This is also corroborated by a survey by U.S.-based Gallup, which
revealed that 54 per cent of the respondents were more pessimistic about
landing jobs in India in 2012 as compared to the previous year.
This
perhaps explains why there is an overall increase in the number of
self-employed with this category growing from 51 per cent to 52 per cent
of the employed workforce, especially among urban males and females, as
formal jobs are not available for the asking.
Also
for the first time, the overall employment in the farm sector, which
accounts for about a quarter of GDP growth, fell from 50 per cent to 49
per cent, while manufacturing and services made up for 24 per cent and
27 per cent of the workforce, respectively. With agriculture providing
only seasonal employment, the male workforce may be moving to urban
areas for comparatively more stable wages and finding its way to the
construction industry. Significantly, a steeper decline is witnessed
among rural females as is evident from the workers’ population ratio
(WPR) in that segment, declining from 26.1 per cent to 24.8 per cent,
along with the number actually employed falling 2.4 per cent to 103
million from 106 million.
According to National
Statistical Commission Chairman Pronab Sen, rural women are shifting
towards self-help groups and self-employment, which is clear from the
percentage of women taking up self-employment rising to 59 per cent in
2011-12 from 56 per cent in 2009-10. Also, it could also be that a large
segment of rural women are not being categorised in the employable
workforce in the WPR, as their activity may be designated as family
household chores.
Clearly, the task before the
government is laid out while its policy direction is on the right track.
A shift from agriculture labour is welcome in terms of higher farm
productivity. However, the labour moving out of the farm sector must be
provided avenues of employment and this can be made possible by
increasing manufacturing activity and raising the sector’s share in the
GDP from about 15 per cent to 25 per cent, as per the programme under
implementation.
No comments:
Post a Comment