Books » Reviews

Updated: May 14, 2013 10:18 IST

Exposing bureaucratic biases

Abusaleh Shariff
Comment (2)   ·   print   ·   T  T  
Poverty and Exclusion of Minorities in
China and India
Poverty and Exclusion of Minorities in China and India

Political empowerment of Muslims is possible only if they are integrated into grassroots institutions

This is a rare book, and probably the first of its kind on two counts. Firstly, it analyses poverty, exclusion and welfare of the minorities, and secondly, compares their situation in two of the top economies with huge population spread and great geographic expanse — namely China and India. Unique also is the analytical rigour on the lines of ‘empirical evidence-based research’, essential especially when the topics are considered sensitive and also less favourite among the mainstream academics both domestically and internationally. It is a useful reading for policy makers, academics, civil society and media not only in China and India, but also across the globe for those inquisitive and eager to know the issues associated with Muslims within the frame of development and inclusiveness. The timeliness of this book cannot be over emphasised. However, there are a number of definitional and analytical problems that are relevant to be pointed out through this review.

Researching cross-country social and developmental issues is not easy. This volume is the result of good primary empirical analysis of issues at hand in the case of China, and then somewhat less empirical but mostly review of already published material has been inserted into each of the China chapters. This becomes clear from the substantive chapters three to seven. Given the limited space, this review will limit itself to issues relating to definitions, estimations and policy relevant conclusions mostly emerging not because of the lack of competence of the authors; but rather due to the approach for the India side analysis which is rather secondary and based mostly on views and interpretations of other people’s work.

Although sufficiently clarified, in India, the concept of minority has religious connotation, yet caste differentiations are forced into the discussion thus creating confusion. A major empirical lapse in the book emerges from using the NSSO data which collects ‘self-reported’ religious but investigator guided caste identities. Those who report Islam as their religion are not given a choice to report their SC status during the conduct of the survey operation. This is because the SCs are codified only for the Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist religions, and the SC status is noted down only when a household head reports one of these religions. Note that almost 60 per cent of the Muslims are classified into ‘others’ category, which essentially makes them conceptually, better-offs, whereas this proportion for the Hindus is only 26 per cent. Therefore, the exclusion of Muslims occurs right from this one bureaucratic stroke so to speak. On the other hand, in the case of OBC identification there is no conditional questioning; yet the reporting itself is influenced by the State level policies and politics. The case in point is OBC reporting of Muslims in West Bengal and Assam (too low); compared with Kerala and Tamil Nadu (too high). This has happened not because there are no OBC type Muslims in West Bengal and Assam, rather the state policy does not recognise OBCs among them.

Comparing averages

Another relevant issue for a comparative analysis is the fallacy of comparing averages of two religious groups, the Muslims, about 14 per cent and the Hindus, about 80 per cent of the population. Given huge social (caste based) and associated economic diversity of the Hindus and not so cohesive Muslims either, it is unwise to compare the whole groups. The PM’s High Level (Sachar) Committee on Muslims therefore created five (some situations six) socio-religious community (SRC) categories. Such a classification is also sensitive to the size requirements to maintain statistical accuracy in evidence-based research.

Although the Muslim/minority population growth in India is higher than other communities; there is strong evidence to suggest that Muslim fertility has declined faster than the Hindu during the last two decades or more. Relying only on census based population data as is done in this book, hides important population dynamics of a favourable demographic transition occurring even among the Muslims in India. According to the three rounds of ‘national family health surveys’, the total fertility rate (TFR), a robust demographic indicator, for India as a whole was 3.30, 2.77 and 2.65 for Hindus for the years 1992-93, 1998-99 and 2005-06 respectively. In the case of Muslims, the respective TFR was 4.41, 3.58 and 3.09. During 2005-06 the Muslim TFR was higher by 0.44 points than the Hindus, but this difference was much higher at 0.81 during 1998-99 and even higher by 1.11 during 1992-93. One finds a fast pace of fertility decline among the Muslims in India, in fact much faster than the Hindu population during last two decades or more.

The book builds up a case study of the socio-political scene in Kashmir which is useful reading. However, the major minority issues confronting the nation emerges from the diversity within the Muslims and their relationship with the majority community at the local level, compounded by systemic bureaucratic bias that confronts the Muslims across the mainland India. Given the importance of decentralised governance, the political empowerment of Muslims and also mainstream participation is possible only if they are integrated into grassroots – the panchayati raj institutions as well the urban-municipalities; which alone will provide opportunities for the evolution of leadership from the ‘ashes’ so to speak. There is also a need for establishing ‘equal opportunity commissions’ at the national and state levels so as to reduce systemic bias and exclusion of Muslims/minorities from the public spaces in India. It is a pity that the chapter on internal migration did not estimate the rural-urban migration stream of Muslims, which is widely believed to be due to social pressures but not yet academically confirmed.

(Abusaleh Shariff is President, Centre for Research and Debates in Development Policy, New Delhi)

Poverty and Exclusion of Minorities in China and India

A. S. Bhalla, Dan Luo;

Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills,

Basingstoke, Hampshire, U.K. £ 70.

More In: Reviews | Books | Chennai | Arts

This book and many other writers on the issue, assume that the biases are only with the majority community and/or are in the 'system'.
They fail to acknowledge the biases in 'minorities' themselves.

At the grassroot level, the 'muslims' in India have many biases which have been well documented in other context, e.g. against polio vaccinations, against working women, nuclear family etc. At some point, it is the upto themselves or the grass root leaders in the 'minorities' to remove these biases. The state cannot forcefully open your kids mouth and put in polio drop or development.

I will give you another example. Based on their interpretation of their religion or culture many women wear clothes that cover them from head to toe. As we all know, that exposure to sunlight is required to process calcium in the body that makes bones stronger. Lack of calcium creates many health issues in women and ill health leads to poverty in the family. Who is biased here?

from:  Abhinav
Posted on: May 14, 2013 at 12:15 IST

Minorities have also been well off since mughal rules. It is the self infliction of muslims that they are suffering. Minorities cannot be given crutches made from cutting the legs of majority. They have rise themselves with education with muslim community does not seem to favor.

from:  ramnivas
Posted on: May 14, 2013 at 11:17 IST
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor



Recent Article in Reviews

Towards new tomorrows

The left can find fresh inspiration in areas which must be addressed urgently — communalism, caste oppression and gender discrimination, the position of women in an often shockingly and brutally patriarchal society »