A Longitudinal Analysis of Chhattisgarh’s Development Trends
Anuj Choudhary (P24006)
1st Year, Masters in Public Policy (MPP), National Law School of India,
University (NLSIU)
Economic Development of India
Dr. Sneha Thapliyal
7th April 2025
Introduction
This essay aims to examine the trends in Human Development and its’s
related indices (Health, Education and Income) for the state of
Chhattisgarh and compare it to the national story in terms of three
decades (1990-2020) and aim to provide an explanation on how different
policies might have impacted these key influential trends
Four the course of the explanation- I have divided this analysis into four
phases that help explain the different points of comparison
1. Pre-Statehood: Industrial Expansion and Resource Extraction under
Madhya Pradesh
2. 2000 Onwards: Statehood and the Economic Reorientation of
Chhattisgarh
3. Liberalisation and Its Uneven Gains: Post-1991 Reforms in a Newly
Forming State
4. The Rise of Rights-Based Development: Welfare, Entitlements, and
Inclusion (2005–2020)
In terms of Comparison the data points being used are the Human
Development Index Scores based on the UNDP framework for both the
state and the nation1. Along with the overall development index
comparisons between specific parameters within the index are also being
carried out to present a more explanatory picture.
Comparison of Data
1
While the data for India was available through the UNDP (the body responsible for calculating the scores and
publishing it) and therefore the data can be authenticated. For the state multiple secondary sources were
searched including journal articles and publications, reports
Figure 1as well as data and statistics repository websites.
The most conservative data available was selected -
[Link]
IND/?levels=1+4&interpolation=0&extrapolation=0
Comparison of Human Development Index
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Chhattisgarh India
Figure 1 Indicates the trends of Human Development Index for both the
state of Chhattisgarh as well as for India from 1990’s to 2022. The mean
HDI for the state of Chhattisgarh has been 0.576 and for India has been
Comparison of Gross National Income (Log)
9
8.5
7.5
6.5
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Chhattisgarh India
Figure 2
0.542.
Figure 2 indicates the comparison of Gross National Income over the
course of 30 years for the state as well as the country. The gross national
incomes are being considered in their logarithmic values which have
been computed from the whole values using the excel logarithmic
function. The mean logarithmic value for the state is 8.063 while for
India it stands at 8.141.
Figure 2 clearly indicate that the process of development in Chhattisgarh
has had phases where the state was performing relatively better than the
national unit unto early 2000’s and then there is a phase where the state
falls bellow the national level and then post 2010 there have been efforts
at revitalisation of economic growth in the state.
As far as figure 1 is concerned the performance of Chhattisgarh over
India has remained better unto 2010’s however what this does not
indicate is that while the state was performing better than the national
unit the score for HDI was constantly under drop unto 2000’s and only
then it attained some improvement. While India caught up with the state
post 2009 the trend in data for the state shows that there has been
improvement.
All of this indicates that there is a larger policy story and multiple factors
at play that have driven these trends for the state. This will be analysed
in the four phases mentioned earlier.
Pre-Statehood: Industrial Expansion and Resource Extraction
under Madhya Pradesh
Chhattisgarh unto 2000’s was a part of Madhya Pradesh and broke out to
form a separate state in 2000’s. During this period the state was
considered rich in natural resources and therefore benefited a lot from
the early years of Industrialisation which explains the high national
income during the 1990’s for the state in comparison to the nation. This
would also explain the higher HDI for the state in comparison to the
nation during the initial years. The state had the highest per capita
income for the BIMARU states and even by 1990’s was contributing more
from the secondary sector than the national unit2. This was due to the
heavy industrial policy adopted by the economic plans of the country
post-independence and units like the Bhillai Steel Plant are an example of
this policy. Another key reason for the better performing HDI of
Chhattisgarh stands to be the educational index where the state during
the early 1990’s was performing twice better than the national level. This
could be credited to the state policy on prioritising primary education 3.
All of this policy initiatives therefore offer us an explanation into why the
state was performing relatively better to the nation.
2000 Onwards: Statehood and the Economic Reorientation of
Chhattisgarh
2
Prabhat P. Ghosh, “Structure of Madhya Pradesh Economy: Pre- and Post-Liberalisation,” Economic and
Political Weekly 40, no. 48 (2005): 5029–37, [Link]
3
Ghosh, “Structure of Madhya Pradesh Economy.”
The post 2000 dip in Chhattisgarh’s HDI as well as gross national income
has been heavily attributed to its new statehood4. This period saw the
state going through a revitalised agenda of growth as well as a large
number of people loose occupations and poverty rising in the state. The
state in this decade had become the fifth poorest state in the country. The
expected education of the state fell from 16.17 at the beginning of the
previous decade to 11.72 at the beginning of this decade. This period
also saw a huge depletion of forest which had a significant impact on the
livelihoods of the people5. This is a period where the state government
focused heavy on policies6 to ensure action against poverty therefore
towards the end of the decade there have been changes noted in the life
expectancy as well as educational index while also attempting to correct
national income for the state7.
While the state did make some right measure towards economic and
human development another initiative at the national level had a positive
impact on the nation’s indicators in comparison to the state.
Liberalisation and Its Uneven Gains: Post-1991 Reforms in a
Newly Forming State
The 1990 reforms were expected to have a huge reform in the state of
Madhya Pradesh of which Chhattisgarh was a part when the LPG reforms
were implemented. However the reforms had only a limited impact on
the economy of the state8. However post 2000’s and attaining statehood
there have been efforts made by the state to address economic concerns.
This came in the form of doubling down on natural resource extraction
and industrialisation while also addressing questions of access to
education and healthcare9. The state’s economic trajectory during this
period saw the establishment of industries, notably in steel and power 10.
This not only created jobs but also positioned Chhattisgarh as a
significant player in India's industrial map11. While this started the
correction pattern in Chhattisgarh’s development Indicators the key
phase responsible is the period after 2005 that saw the realisation of
4
Dr Ajad Singh and Anushka Rai, “Evaluating Human Development Trends in Chhattisgarh after Economic
Reforms in India,” International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews 4, no. 11 (November 17, 2023):
1529–35, [Link]
5
“Human Development Report 2005 : Chhattisgarh” (UNDP, 2005),
[Link]
ull_report.pdf.
6
Huge strides were made in reducing undernutrition, inadequate sanitation, solid cooking fuel,
housing materials, and assets. All 10 Multi-Dimensional Poverty Indicators had reductions.
7
“MULTIDIMENSIONAL POVERTY IN CHHATTISGARH: A Measure for Action” (Oxford Poverty and Human
Development Initiative, 2020), [Link]
%29_4vs.pdf.
8
Ghosh, “Structure of Madhya Pradesh Economy.”
9
B L Sonekar, “HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX IN CHHATTISGARH STATE : AN ANALYTICAL STUDY,” Social
Development XV, no. 1 (2019): 104–10, [Link]
10
This paper does not comment on the appropriateness of the methods as there is a vast body of literature on
the negative impact of such policies on the state’s vulnerable and minority population. All the paper does is
specify the policy that led to this particular economic trend.
11
Singh and Rai, “Evaluating Human Development Trends in Chhattisgarh after Economic Reforms in India.”
rights-based programmes into the state’s economic and human
development agenda.
The Rise of Rights-Based Development: Welfare, Entitlements, and
Inclusion (Post 2005)
While the state had begun taking some measures towards development
agenda the post 2005 period which saw the ushering of rights-based
programmes like Forest Rights Act 2006, Mahatma Gandhi National
Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005, National Food Security Act, 2013
and the declaration of right to education as a fundamental right as well
as the strengthening of the state’s subsidy programmes that have led to
the ongoing positive direction of the state’s developmental indices as
well as the state catching up with the national indices. The state is one of
the top five performers in terms of employment generation for its
population under the scheme and therefore it has had a huge boost in
terms of generating income for its population12. Similarly the state also
has the highest number of claims for rights under the FRA and while the
rejection rate for Chhattisgarh is high the number of people who have
also received their titles and then able to convert forest lands for
agriculture or engage in the trade of Non-Timber Forest Produce is also
high and has had a relatively strong impact on income and livelihoods
particularly for the tribal communities of the state13. Similarly the food
security act and the strengthening of the state subsidy has led to a
reduction in food expenditure for the population and therefore allowing
other avenues of investment or expenditure14. Overall this period has led
to a revival for state development as well as its HDI indices and therefore
allowing it to move closer towards the national level.
Conclusion
The state of Chhattisgarh has a mixed track record in terms of economic
and human development however the period post 2010 and the
realisation of various rights-based reforms have shown the way for states
like Chhattisgarh that are often neglected in the conversations of
economic development. These reforms have not only led to increase in
income or access to a larger basket of goods but have a multi-faceted
impact on the lives of the state’s population that includes access to
education and healthcare. Overall if current trends are to observed and
12
Farzana Afridi, Amrita Dhillon, and Arka Roy Chaudhuri, “Inter State Comparison of Performance in
MGNREGA(2011-2018) and PMGSY(2000-2018),” Working Paper, Anti Corruption Evidence Research
Programme (GI ACE, December 2021), [Link]
[Link].
13
Shruti Mokashi and Sharachchandra Lele, “Community Forest Rights Recognition in Chhattisgarh State:
Progress and Challenges,” Centre for Environment and Development ATREE (Bengaluru: ATREE, October 2021),
[Link]
14
Giorgia Barboni et al., “Chhattisgarh’s Public Distribution System Is Delivering Much-Needed Food to the
Poor.,” Policy Brief (Yale Economic Growth Center), accessed April 7, 2025,
[Link]
the progress remains constant the state will continue to perform better
and match the national performance.
Appendix 1 (State Indices)
Year HDI Health Index Educational Index Income Index
1990 0.563 0.704 0.56 0.452
1991 0.566 0.711 0.566 0.45
1992 0.571 0.718 0.571 0.455
1993 0.566 0.719 0.549 0.459
1994 0.562 0.72 0.53 0.465
1995 0.559 0.72 0.512 0.473
1996 0.557 0.721 0.498 0.48
1997 0.554 0.723 0.487 0.483
1998 0.552 0.724 0.476 0.488
1999 0.552 0.725 0.466 0.498
2000 0.553 0.727 0.469 0.497
2001 0.554 0.729 0.467 0.499
2002 0.557 0.732 0.473 0.499
2003 0.567 0.734 0.493 0.504
2004 0.573 0.735 0.501 0.51
2005 0.578 0.738 0.509 0.516
2006 0.584 0.739 0.517 0.522
2007 0.58 0.737 0.503 0.525
2008 0.573 0.734 0.492 0.522
2009 0.566 0.732 0.47 0.526
2010 0.563 0.73 0.463 0.53
2011 0.565 0.729 0.467 0.53
2012 0.562 0.729 0.459 0.53
2013 0.568 0.73 0.466 0.538
2014 0.578 0.731 0.483 0.548
2015 0.586 0.732 0.492 0.559
2016 0.597 0.731 0.511 0.569
2017 0.607 0.747 0.514 0.584
2018 0.611 0.76 0.502 0.598
2019 0.618 0.773 0.503 0.608
2020 0.618 0.762 0.519 0.597
2021 0.613 0.717 0.529 0.608
2022 0.625 0.725 0.546 0.617
Appendix 2 (National HDI and Gross National Income (Log))
Year HDI Log NI
1990 0.434 7.493285
1991 0.437 7.480878
1992 0.442 7.513654
1993 0.446 7.540463
1994 0.452 7.585968
1995 0.458 7.640856
1996 0.465 7.695469
1997 0.471 7.716852
1998 0.477 7.758065
1999 0.485 7.825423
2000 0.49 7.841958
2001 0.495 7.873179
2002 0.501 7.894494
2003 0.514 7.952152
2004 0.523 8.01186
2005 0.532 8.071844
2006 0.541 8.133532
2007 0.55 8.196178
2008 0.557 8.210588
2009 0.562 8.272295
2010 0.572 8.335159
2011 0.586 8.374629
2012 0.594 8.411405
2013 0.6 8.459645
2014 0.611 8.519514
2015 0.619 8.584773
2016 0.63 8.643376
2017 0.636 8.707147
2018 0.636 8.758941
2019 0.638 8.78788
2020 0.638 8.714347
2021 0.633 8.786067
2022 0.644 8.846573