The growth story of Gujarat is one of a state punching above its weight.

With only 6 per cent of India's land

mass and barely 5 per cent of its population, Gujarat has managed to account for 7.6 per cent of the country's
GDP and 22 per cent of its exports. Its annual Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP) growth from 2001 to
2013 (growth has slowed down since) averaged nearly 10 per cent, which is faster than India's. This is an
extraordinary accomplishment. Between 1980 and 2013, Gujarat grew at an average rate of 5.1 per cent. If
Gujarat were a country with a 10 million-plus population, this would be the third-fastest growth rate in the
world, after China and South Korea.

What were the factors that helped Gujarat accomplish this extraordinary growth? Was it geography, native
entrepreneurship, a historical edge in commerce and trade or simply good governance? The reasons for
Gujarat's growth can be debated. Did the fact that Gujarat has the longest coastline-1,600 km-contribute to its
rapid growth? Gujarat has served as an integral native trading hub for centuries, one of the most dominant in
the Arabian Sea. After all, in India, most coastal states have shown higher growth than the BIMARU (an
acronym for Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and UP, referring to their poor economic standing) states. A
coastal state has the twin advantages of greater global access as well as lower transportation costs. Other
coastal states, such as Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, have also performed well. But sustaining rapid
growth, as Gujarat has done, is not easy. Almost 25 per cent of India's sea cargo passes through Gujarat's
ports.

Was it the renowned

Gujarati entrepreneurial
spirit that helped bring
about Gujarat's
transformation from being
only the seventh richest
big state in 1980-81 (in
terms of per capita GSDP)
to the third richest in
2013-14? Gujaratis have
dominated businesses all
over India for centuries.
The Indian diaspora is
dominated by Gujarati
businessmen. Or was it
good governance under
successive regimes in
Gujarat that brought about
such development?
Gujarat has been among
the fastest growing states
even in the past. Despite
poor rainfall, it has made
strides in agriculture.
Unlike Punjab and
Haryana, states which
launched the first Green
Revolution with
government support,
Gujarat's agricultural
transformation came via the market route. Cash crops such as cotton, oilseeds and tobacco dominated the
farm growth story. A milk revolution and largescale exports of fish accompanied the growth in horticulture and
sharp increase in agricultural productivity. The agricultural turnaround-with growth rates as high as 11.1 per
cent between 2000 and 2013-was accomplished despite water scarcity. Gujarat knows the art of turning every
calamity and tragedy into an opportunity. Despite the plague in Surat and the earthquake in Kachchh, the
state's economic growth rate has surged in the last one-and-a-half decades. The good governance story of
Gujarat, however, takes a knock when it comes to inclusive growth and social sector development. Gujarat is a
'model state' in economic growth but a 'middle state' in social sector growth. Both agricultural and
manufacturing growth is in double digits, but of the 20 major states in India, Gujarat's ranking is always
between 9 and 12 on all major social sector rankings. This is irrespective of how the measurements are done.
Education, health and other social sectors have grown much more conservatively. The challenge for the
leaders in Gujarat is
finding ways to bring
about inclusive growth,
alongside the remarkable
growth rate.

STATE OF THE
STATE REPORT
With a firm belief that the
future of the country lies
in its states and Union
territories, the State of
the State (SoS) survey,
started in 2003, emerged
as the gold standard for
analysing the
performance of states.
The State of the State
report was the next
logical step. It analyses
the performance of
districts in each state
over a period of time, and across various categories. Each category is usually a composite index of a few
parameters, which are measurable across time, provided data is available. In the case of Gujarat, ideally one
should compare all 33 districts. Seven of these districts were created in 2013, and eight were created over the
period of 1997 to 2010. Data for the recent seven is not available. For the eight districts created earlier, data is
available sporadically. Thus, the district analysis presented in this report is for the 18 'original' districts.
GUJARAT VERSUS SIX STATES

How well has Gujarat performed in terms of GSDP growth, education, health and in other key categories can
be best assessed by comparing its performance with that of other states; in particular, states closest to it in
terms of socio-economic development. If 1999-2000 is taken as the 'base' year, it is found that across a wide
array of indicators, Gujarat is closest to these six states-Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Maharashtra,
Punjab and Tamil Nadu. Three of them are coastal states, like Gujarat. These states will be referred to as C7
(comparable seven). Performance is measured in terms of various indicators of improvement (e.g. growth)
over the period of 1999 to the latest year for which there is data-generally 2011 (latest year for National
Sample Survey, NSS, data on education) and 2013 (latest year for GSDP).
Per capita GSDP growth: This is where Gujarat has excelled. The analysis of GSDP performance is
conducted over two time periods- 1980-1999 and 2000-2013, for which there is data. The intention behind the
comparison between the two time periods is to analytically separate the influence of history from good
governance in later years. If per capita GSDP is the criterion, Gujarat was the seventh richest big state in India
in 1980-81, fifth richest in 1999-2000 and third richest in 2013-14.
In per capita growth, Gujarat was the third-fastest growing state among C7. The fastest growing state was
Maharashtra (4.3 per cent), followed closely by Tamil Nadu (4.1 per cent) and Gujarat (4 per cent). Despite
being a relatively rich state, Gujarat pushed itself into becoming the second-fastest growing state for the period
2000-2013 (average of 6.5 per cent annually). The fastest growing state was Uttarakhand (9.2 per cent), a
relatively smaller and newer state.
Inequality: Was growth accompanied by growing inequality in the C7 states? Yes. Six of these states
witnessed a rise in inequality (measured by the Gini index, which assigns a value of zero if everyone has equal
income and a value of 1 if one person has all the income). Only one state, Tamil Nadu, witnessed a decline (-
0.3 per cent annual decline for the 12 years from 1999 to 2011, according to NSS data). Gujarat was the third-
best performer, with an annual Gini increase of 0.7 per cent
Education: Gujarat hasn't performed well here. NSS data on educational achievement (highest class
attainment) is a much better index of educational attainment than provided by the literacy variable. Literacy
tells whether a person is literate; educational attainment offers a measure of educational achievement.
In 1999-2000, Gujarat had about the same educational level (average educational achievement of 5.3 years)
as Haryana, Punjab and Tamil Nadu. In 2011-12, the state improved its average education level to 6.3 years;
however, this improvement was the second worst, behind Kerala. It should be emphasised that Kerala had the
highest education level in 1999-2000 (7.4 years) and maintained its highest education level position in 2011-12
(8.8 years). As with income, there is a catch-up phenomena with education (and health), i.e. higher attainment
states tend to improve at a lower rate. Hence, that Kerala improved its educational attainment at a rate of 1.4
years per annum is not a surprise; that Gujarat's rate of growth in education was only 1.5 per cent per annum
is a big, negative surprise.
Health: If measured by improvement in (the lowering of) the infant mortality rate (IMR), Gujarat does better in
health than education-a decline in IMR by 3.6 per cent per annum, identical to Haryana's achievement. Kerala
has the lowest rate of improvement (a decline of only 1.3 per cent per annum, from 14 deaths per 1,000 births
in 1999 to 12 deaths in 2011). Himachal Pradesh, too, has a low average rate of decline (IMR fell from 54 to
38 deaths per 1,000 births or by 2.9 per cent per annum).
REGIONAL ANALYSIS OF GUJARAT
Gujarat was formed in May 1960 with 17 districts. Over the next six years, two more districts were added, one
of which became the state's capital. Another 14 districts were formed from 1997 to 2013. Consistent data for
all variables is only available for the initially created 17 districts and for most variables for 18 districts. The
analysis is done at the district level, taking these 18 districts as individual units, and at a regional level by
classifying them into groups as described below. For ease of analysis, the entire state has been divided into
three broad regions: Western Gujarat, Central Gujarat and the Eastern Corridor. The demarcation is done on
the basis of income and poverty levels in 1999, weighted by the population of each district. Such an exercise
shows Central Gujarat as most prosperous, followed by Western Gujarat and the Eastern Corridor (see
graphic: Centre Drives Growth). Any regional data provided is computed as a simple average of all the districts
in the region.
Overall income: Since overall income comprises three categories-real wages, per capita household
consumption and absolute level of poverty-we look at all of these individually. The most prosperous area,
Central Gujarat, has shown maximum improvement in wages-an increase from an average wage of Rs 136.7
(2011-12 prices) to Rs 200.9 in 2011-as well as per capita household consumption. In terms of wages, Central
Gujarat was followed by the Eastern Corridor (Rs 124.1 in 1999 to Rs 163.4 in 2011) and then Western
Gujarat. Western Gujarat, which used to be best in wages in 1999-2000, shows maximum improvement in
reducing absolute poverty (from average absolute poverty of 26.5 per cent in 1999 to 9.5 per cent in 2011). In
consumption, Western Gujarat is most improved, followed by Central Gujarat, then the East.
Education: In education, Western Gujarat has shown the best improvement from 1999 to 2011, across all
the variables for education: mean years in education completed by an average 15-64 year old for overall,
male-female as well as female-male ratios. While Central Gujarat ranks second followed by the Eastern
Corridor, the latter beat the former in improvement of female to male education, which could be attributed to
the performance of one of the Eastern Corridor districts-Valsad. Valsad is the winner in the category of gender
equality for education.
Health: Central Gujarat performs the best in lowering IMR, followed by the Eastern Corridor and Western
Gujarat. In 1999, the Eastern Corridor showed the worst IMR, followed by Central Gujarat and Western
Gujarat respectively. Central Gujarat improved from 58.4 to 39.4 over the period of 1999-2011 to overtake
Western Gujarat. This clearly indicates improvement of healthcare in the region. The Eastern Corridor, too,
has closely followed, from 59.5 to 41.8 IMR. One of the Eastern Corridor districts-Bhavnagar-has witnessed a
significant drop in IMR.
Overall rank: Central Gujarat is the best in level of development. It also shows the highest improvement
among the three regions. The conclusion is based on achievements in income, health and education. Western
Gujarat and the Eastern Corridor take the second and third positions respectively.
Gender equality in education: There are three measures for educational achievement in 2011-years of
education (male), years of education (female), and female education as a fraction of male education. The
female-male education ratio captures gender equality. In India, educational discrimination against girls is
rampant. But with programmes such as Beti Bachao Beti Padao, there is a new consciousness about
education of the girl child. The closer the girl to boy education ratio is to 1, the district is that much closer to
gender equality.
Valsad shows a level higher than 100 (equality in male-female education achievement levels) for 2011; this
number is the highest in the country. The data was taken from NSS, which, for some districts, can have small
sample sizes. However, even in 2009-10, Valsad had the highest gender equality in education in Gujarat, with
a ratio of 95.5 per cent. In 1999-2000, the education gender equality ratio was 72 in Valsad, i.e. girls had only
72 per cent of the education of boys. So no matter how the data is sliced (1999-2000 to 2011-12 or till 2009-
10), Valsad shows the highest rate of increase in girl-child education compared to boys.
 DISTRICT-LEVEL PERFORMANCE
This section will analyse performance in terms of
levels, circa 2011, and the next section will look at
performance as measured by changes (or growth) between 1999 and 2011. All rankings are on the basis of
the 18 districts for which consistent data are available: Ahmedabad, Amreli, Banaskantha, Bharuch,
Bhavnagar, Gandhinagar, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kachchh, Kheda, Mehsana, Panchmahal, Rajkot,
Sabarkantha, Surat, Surendranagar, Vadodara and Valsad.

RANKINGS BY LEVEL-2011
Income: In 2011, for the three income variables (real wages, real per capita income, and level of absolute
poverty), Ahmedabad is the number one district. It has a score of 8 (the best score possible is 3, a rank of 1 in
each category), followed by Kachchh (score of 11). At third place is Rajkot with a score of 12.
Education: There are three measures for educational achievement in 2011-years of education (male), years
of education (female), and female education as a fraction of male education. The best score is a sum of ranks
of 3. For the first category, Gandhinagar ranks the highest. Ahmedabad ranks the highest for the second
category of female years in education. Valsad ranks the highest for the third category. If we look at the overall
education, incorporating all three, Ahmedabad holds the top position, followed by Rajkot and Bharuch. It is
interesting that Ahmedabad and Rajkot are tied at an overall score of 8, and some distance behind is Bharuch.
In the race for best district, it would appear that for income and education, Ahmedabad is in the lead.
Health: IMR is the major indicator of health in 2011. Bhavnagar has the lowest IMR of 8.3. This is followed by
Surat at 11 and then, after a long gap, Amreli, Kachchh, and Mehsana at 27.5, 28.4 and 30.5 respectively.
Overall rank: The overall ranking is estimated as the sum of ranks for income, education and health. The
implicit weighting is that each category has one-third weight. However, as we have noted above, no matter
what the weights, Ahmedabad is the unambiguous winner. The best (minimum) possible sum of the ranks is 7-
3 (income) + 3 (education) + 1 (health). Ahmedabad scores 23. Next is Rajkot (28), then Kachchh (38).
Law and order: While there is data for various crime variables from 1999 to 2011, the ranking for crime is not
included in our assessment for the best district. Nevertheless, an assessment of how each district has
performed with respect to crime is relevant. Four indicators are combined to obtain an overall assessment.
These variables (per hundred thousand of population) are murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping and rape.
The best score obtainable is 4. The district with the least crime rate is Sabarkantha (score of 15), followed by
Valsad, Junagadh and Kheda at 18, 19 and 24 respectively. Bhavnagar has the fewest rapes per unit of
population, followed by Panchmahal and Junagadh.
CONCLUSION
Gujarat has shown it can achieve rapid growth for an extended period. From 1980 to 2013, average per capita
GSDP increased at a rate of 5.1 per cent per annum. Gujarat could rank as the third fastest growing country in
the world with a population over 10 million. India ranks sixth for this time period. Gujarat's record in education
and health is not as good. Education improved at 2.2 per cent per annum, about the same as India's (2.1 per
cent). This would place Gujarat as ninth in the world. For Gujarat, the strategy should be to improve its
education system, healthcare and other social sectors on a war footing as these could become obstacles in its
growth. The government must focus on the economic-social transformation of the Eastern Corridor and
Western Gujarat. The state must uplift the tribal, Dalit and minority communities from the remote, rural areas,
who have been left out by the market-led growth. This will lead to inclusive development and reduce inequality-
the best recipe for growth.