To: Planning commission

       Government of India

     

Cc: Ministry of HRD, Ministry of Railways and Ministry of Tribal Affairs

       Government of India

 

       Chief Minister

       Government of Orissa

 

Subject: Establishing a multi-campus central university in KBK and contiguous backward districts of Orissa and improving their accessibility during the 11th five year plan.

 

Dear Esteemed Planning Commission members:

 

We would like to request you to include in the 11th plan the establishment of a multi-campus central university in south-western Orissa that includes the ill-famed KBK districts of Orissa. These districts are not only among the most backward districts of Orissa but also have a very high tribal population. The literacy rates in these districts are abysmally low, let alone the enrollment ratio in higher education.

 

We would also like to request you to include in the 11th plan the improvement of the accessibility to this region (i) by allocating necessary funds and helping in the early completion of the Vijayawada-Ranchi highway and (ii) by allocating sufficient funds so that the various railway lines under construction in this area are completed within the 11th plan period. The railway lines under construction in this area include parts of the three corridors of KhurdaRd-Phulbani-Balangir, Nuapada-Gunupur-Therubali, and LanjigarhRd-Bhawanipatna-Junagarh-Nabarangpur-Jeypore-Malkangiri.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Summary of the Whys and Hows

 

WHY:

 

Why 1: Orissa is the poorest state in India and the KBK districts  are the most backward districts in Orissa as well as India. According to the planning commission’s 2000 figures 47.15% of Orissa’s population was below the poverty line. In southern Orissa (of which KBK is a part) this number is reported in [4] (page 7) to be 89.17% of the people according to the 1999-2000 NSS data  and 72% of the family according to the 1997 census.

 

Why 2: The literacy rates in the KBK districts are abysmally low. They are as follows: Malkangiri 31.26%, Nabarangpur 34.26%, Rayagada 35.61%, Koraput   36.2%, Nuapada 42.29%, Kalahandi 46.2%, Balangir  54.93%, Sonepur 64.07%. Two adjacent districts also have low literacy: Gajapati 41.73% and Kandhamala 52.95%. The state average is 63.1%.

 

Why 3: The existing and recent programs for KBK such as LTAP [24], RLTAP [25] and BRGP do not address the issue of higher education in KBK and the lack of an higher education component in these programs has restricted the effectiveness of these programs. Similarly, the ministries of tribal affairs at the state and the central level have so far focused on K-12 education through means such as Ekal Vidyalaya, Navodaya Vidyalaya, hostels for tribal students [18], etc., but have not focused[1] on higher education.

 

Why 4: KBK needs sons of the soil, (highly) educated in the soil teachers, doctors, engineers, officers etc. to help in bringing KBK to the main stream of Orissa and India.[2] With a high tribal population, it is important that they have higher education opportunities right where they live as often they do not venture out to Delhi, Hyderabad, Allahabad or Benaras to take advantage of the ST seats in the high quality central universities there and the ones that venture out do not usually return home.

 

In this regard one must note that in the US a major percentage of Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans who have a higher education degree have it from colleges and universities (such as HBCUs — Historically Black Colleges and Universities) near their home rather than in far flung universities.

 

Why 5: KBK districts have a very high tribal population. They are as follows: Malkangiri 58.36%, Rayagada 56.04%, Nabarangpur 55.27%, Koraput 50.67%, Nuapada 35.95%, Kalahandi 28.88%, Balangir 22.06%, Sonepur 9.5%. Two adjacent districts also have high tribal population. They are Kandhamala 51.51% and  Gajapati 47.88%.

 

Why 6: Orissa has no central university [30,31], IIT, IIM, IISc or any similar institution of national importance that is fully funded by the HRD ministry of India. It is high time a central university is established in Orissa. Most other countries where they have multiple higher education institutions fully funded by the central/national government, they make sure each state has at least one. For example, in Japan each of its 47 prefectures has at least one national university [10,11].

 

Why 7: Central government spending in fully centrally funded higher education institutions in Orissa is towards the bottom among all states in India. A rough calculation in [44,45] http://www.baral.us/hrd-nh.htm showed that while the central government spent (in 2005-06) per person Rs 4.07 on fully-funded-by-center HRD institution in Orissa, it spent Rs 177.12 in Delhi, Rs 105.42 in Uttaranchal, Rs 105 in Arunachal Pradesh, Rs 77.7 in Assam, Rs 33.78 in Himachal Pradesh, Rs 28.10 in West Bengal, Rs 25.12 in Karnataka, Rs 17.79 in Tamil Nadu, Rs 17.09 in Maharastra, Rs 17.08 in UP, Rs 16.2 in Jharkhand, Rs 16.05 in Andhra, Rs 14.5 in J & K, Rs 13.38 in Punjab,  Rs 8.52 in Haryana, Rs 7.9 in Kerala, Rs 7.39 in Chhattisgarh, Rs 7.2 in MP, Rs 4.87 in GujuratRs 2.59 in Rajasthan, and Rs 1.87 in Bihar. We then give specific recommendations that will remove the disparity. Similarly, a calculation based on the Moily committee report [43] at http://chitta.googlepages.com/moilycommitteerecommendationworsensinequity shows that the committee recommends spending Rs. 97.94 per person across India. Among the states, the expenditure per person is highest in Delhi  (Rs. 1685.64) followed by Uttaranchal (Rs. 585.16), Tripura (Rs. 158.72), Himachal Pradesh (Rs. 128.3), Assam (Rs. 127.52), Meghalaya (Rs. 122.92), West Bengal (Rs. 122.09), Jharkhand (Rs. 117.48), UP (Rs. 110.99), Manipur (Rs. 109.43) and Mizoram (Rs. 98.29). On the bottom end Arunachal Pradesh, Goa and Sikkim have zero estimated expenditure, followed by Bihar (Rs. 13.13), Andhra Pradesh (Rs. 24.46), Rajasthan (Rs. 25.08), Gujarat (Rs. 30.82), Orissa (Rs. 33.59), Kerala (Rs. 49.24), Madhya Pradesh (Rs. 49.35), Maharashtra (Rs. 59.67), Haryana (Rs. 62.84), Chhatisgarh  (Rs. 70.51), Nagaland (Rs. 70.86), Punjab (Rs. 81.06), Karnataka (Rs. 91.96), Tamil Nadu (Rs. 97.36) and Jammu & Kashmir (Rs. 97.76).

 

Why 8: As per the NSSO study of 2004-2005 Orissa is at the bottom of most higher education parameters. For example, Table 3.14.1 shows that in the 15-19 age group 29% people in Orissa are attending school/college and in the 20-24 age group this number for Orissa is 6.1%. (Both numbers are lowest among all but the small states/UTs of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu and Lakshadweep.) For the Scheduled Tribe population these numbers are 17.1% for the 15-19 age group and 4.1% for the 20-24 age group.

 

Why 9: Although central universities are usually open for people all over India it is undeniable that people leaving near it have an advantage over others, especially in pursuing graduate, part-time and executive programs. Hence it is unfair that while many other states have central universities plus more than one institutions of national importance, Orissa has none. This inequity has hurt Orissa and is one of the reasons Orissa is at the bottom of most educational, literacy, employment, and economic criteria.

 

Why 10: One may wonder why not establish state level higher education institutions in the backward districts. First, Orissa has some state funded colleges in these places and does not have the finances to establish more. Second, even if the state establishes new institutions, it may suffer the problem that many educated people from outside may not come to join these institutions. On the other hand central universities have a reputation because of which people from not only the same state, but from all over India are willing to relocate and join them.

 

Why 11: Central Universities work. Central university and even Kendriya Vidyalayas in far flung places attract teachers from all over India. In the North East the multitudes of central universities and other centrally funded institutions have contributed significantly to the improved literacy and higher education enrollment in those states. From the NSSO figures of Table 3.14.1 about attendance rates among 15-19 year olds and 20-24 year olds in the Northeastern states we have the following:

 

State

Attendance among 15-19 yr olds

Attendance among 20-24 yr olds

Arunachal Pradesh

61.1%

22.6%

Assam

53.2%

12.8%

Manipur

79.8%

44.3%

Meghalaya

52.6%

14.3%

Mizoram

68.7%

20.8%

Nagaland

79.9%

32.7%

Sikkim

68.7%

20.9%

Tripura

59.6%

11.9%

Orissa

29.0%

6.1%

 

 

Why 12: The 8 districts of KBK and the adjacent Kandhamala and Gajapati districts do not have any university.

Why 13:  Even if the proposed Indira Gandhi National Tribal University[3] is established in Amarkantak (Madhya Pradesh) with multiple campuses, it will neither be able to properly cover nor address the KBK issues. KBK needs its own central university. However the Amarkantak University could have campuses in the other tribal belt of Orissa consisting of the districts Mayurbhanj (57.87%), Sundergarh (50.74%), Keonjhar (44.52%), Sambaplur (35.08%), Deogarh (33.31%) and Jharsuguda (31.88%) with their tribal population percentage shown in the parentheses.

 

HOW:

 

How 1: We propose that the KBK Central University be a multi-campus one with campuses in each of the 8 KBK districts plus in the two adjacent backward and heavily tribal districts of Kandhamal and Gajapati. The particular locations we have in mind are Parlakhemundi (Gajapati), Rayagada (Rayagada), Koraput (Koraput), Jeypore (Koraput)
Bhawanipatna (Kalahandi), Malkangiri (Malkangiri), Nabarangpur (Nabarangpur), Titilagarh (Balangir), Nuaparha (Nuapara), Balangir (Balangir), Sonapur (Sonepur)
Baligurha (Kandhamala)  and Phulbani (Kandhamala).

 

How 2: We envision the KBK Central University to have graduate, post-graduate as well as vocational departments. It would have the faculties [15] of Languages (English, Oriya, Sanskrit, Telugu, Hindi), Tribal medicine, Commerce, Education, Mathematical Sciences (Mathematics, Statistics, Operations Research), Computing, Physical Sciences (Physics, Chemistry, Geology, Geophysics, etc.), Life Sciences (Botany, Zoology), Applied Sciences (Biochemistry, Microbiology, etc.), Law, Management (including rural management), Music and Fine arts (including tribal music, Dance), Social Sciences (Economics, Political Science, History, Anthropology etc.), Engineering and Technology, Architecture, Design, Agriculture, Pharmacy, Medical Science, Journalism, Physical Education and Sports, Veterinary Science,  Nursing and Tribal studies. We do not expect that all of these faculties will be established during the 11th plan and nor do we expect that all of them will be fully centrally funded.

 

How 3: We expect the funding of the university to be shared between the HRD ministry, ICAR (Agriculture ministry), Health ministry and the Tribal ministry at the central level, with free land provided by the state government, and particular research centers established and funded by the various industries that mine and/process minerals in the KBK area. We propose that the state government and the central government set aside a percentage of royalty and other taxes they obtain from mining and mineral processing industries operating in these districts towards this university. Similarly, we propose the companies to set aside a percentage of their profit for this university.

 

How 4: The KBK central university will have significant percentage reservation (say 35% each) for Schedule Tribes and for the people of KBK.

 

How 5: The various colleges of the KBK Central University will tie up with the various K-12 school initiatives (such as girls and boys hostels, ashram schools, Ekal Vidyalayas, Navodaya Vidyalayas), ITIs and vocational institutions in the area. In particular, each KBK University campus location will have attached K-12 schools, ITI and vocational institutions.

 

How 6: Due to the urgency of the situation in KBK we suggest that the university activities be immediately started in the premises of the following state government colleges in the area. S.K.C.G. College, Paralakhemundi,  Vikram Dev College, Jeypore, Govt. College Phulbani, Rayagada College, Rayagada,  Rajendra College, Bolangir and Government College, Bhawanipatna.

 

 

Elaboration of some of the Whys and Hows

 

Why 1:  Orissa is one of the poorest state in India and KBK districts are the most backward districts in Orissa as well as all of India.

 

The KBK districts of Orissa [3,26-29] are the most backward district cluster of India. They consist of the eight districts of Kalahandi, Bolangir, Koraput, Nuapada, Sonepur, Malkangiri, Nabarangpur and Rayagada which were formed from the three undivided districts of Kalahandi, Bolangir, and Koraput. They are so ill-famed that they are probably the only districts known all over the country by their initials. Special programs, such as the LTAP (Long Term Action Plan) and RLTAP (Revised Long Term Action Plan) were devised for them. In the current Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) there is a KBK Special plan and these 8 districts are singled out from the total 250 districts in the BRGF [35,36] . (See http://pib.nic.in/release/rel_print_page.asp?relid=19759  and

http://pib.nic.in/release/rel_print_page1.asp?relid=19785 )

 

Following are some statistical data about the KBK districts culled from the KBK web site http://kbk.nic.in/background.htm. We have added a few additional data points about the adjoining districts of Gajapati and Kandhamal using figures from [1].

 

The KBK districts account for 19.72% population over 30.59% geographical area of the State. 89.89% people of this region still live in villages. Lower population density (152 persons / sq.km) in comparison to 236 for Orissa indicates difficult living conditions and an undeveloped economy. Tribal communities dominate this region. As per 1991 Census, about 38.72% people of these districts belong to the Scheduled Tribes (ST) communities including four primitive tribal groups (PTG), i.e., Bondas, Dadai, Langia Sauras and Dangaria Kandhas. 44 CD blocks are included in Tribal Sub Plan (TSP). In addition, 16.63% population belong to the Scheduled Castes (SC) communities as per 1991 Census. Literacy rates are also far below the State as well as National averages. Female literacy is only 24.72%. Some demographic and literacy indicators are summarized below in Table 1.  

 

Table 1: Demographic and Literacy Indicators in the KBK Districts: 2001

District

Popu-Density

Population Indicators

Literacy Rate

Total (000)

Female

(%)

Rural

(%)

ST*

(%)

SC*

(%)

Total

(%)

Female

(%)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1. Koraput

134

1,178

49.96

83.18

50.67

13.41

36.20

24.81

2. Malkangiri

83

480

49.91

92.79

58.36

19.96

31.26

21.28

3.Nawrangpur

192

1,018

49.81

94.18

55.27

15.09

34.26

21.02

4. Rayagada

116

823

50.71

85.98

56.04

14.28

35.61

24.31

5. Bolangir

203

1,336

49.56

88.45

22.06

15.39

54.91

39.27

6. Sonepur

231

541

49.13

92.59

22.11

9.50

64.07

47.28

7. Kalahandi

168

1,334

50.00

92.49

28.88

17.01

46.20

29.56

8. Nuapada

138

531

50.15

94.34

35.59

13.09

42.29

26.01

KBK Districts

152

7,241

49.91

89.89

38.72

16.63

36.58

24.72

9.   Kandhamal

81

648

50.04

93.19

51.51

18.21

52.95

36.19

10. Gajapati

120

518

50.16

89.82

47.88

8.77

41.73

28.91

Orissa

236

36,707

49.29

85.03

22.21

16.20

63.61

50.97

As per the 1997 census of BPL families, about 72% families below poverty line live in this region. District-wise information about the number of BPL families as per 1992 and 1997 census are summarized in Table 2.  

       Table 2 : Census of Families Below Poverty Line (BPL): 1992 & 1997*

S.

No.

District

HCR ^ (%)

1992 Census

1997 Census

Total

BPL

Percent

(%)

Total

BPL

Percent

(%)

(lakh families)

(lakh families)

1

2

3

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

Kalahandi

80.19

2.41

2.07

85.77

3.08

1.93

62.71

  2

Nuapada

0.94

0.79

83.64

1.27

1.09

85.70

3

Bolangir

48.89

2.39

1.81

75.82

3.30

2.01

61.06

  4

Sonepur

0.92

0.57

62.29

1.10

0.80

73.02

5

Koraput

92.24

1.88

1.63

86.59

2.65

2.22

83.81

  6

Malkangiri

0.80

0.68

84.81

1.09

0.89

81.88

  7

Nawrangpur

1.52

1.38

90.56

2.15

1.59

73.66

  8

Rayagada

1.42

1.22

86.04

1.88

1.36

72.03

Total (Southern Orissa)

87.14

12.28

10.14

82.60

16.52

11.89

71.97

                          Note:             ^  HCR – Headcount ratio as per 1999-00 NSS data (Manoj Panda: 2002)

                                             *  Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Orissa. 

Other socio-economic indicators including population composition and density, net area irrigated, hospital beds, and connectivity of villages (due to criss-crossed terrains) to growth centres and service centres are also far from satisfactory. According to the report of “the Committee on the Constitution of Separate Development Board in Orissa”, 96% of CD Blocks in these districts are either “very backward” or “backward”. To be specific, 49 CD Blocks of KBK districts are regarded as “very backward” and 28 CD Blocks are considered as “backward”.

 

The following map shows the literacy of the KBK districts as compared to other districts in Orissa.

 

 

As evident from the above map the adjacent (to KBK) districts of Gajapati and Kandhamal also have very low literacy.

 

We now review how these 10 districts (8 KBK districts and the adjacent Gajapati and Kandhamal)  compare with other backward districts of India.

 

1.1  Districts listed in the book by Bibek Debroy and Laveesh Bhandari

 

In their book [6] titled “District Level Deprivation in the New Millenium” Bibek Debroy of Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies and Laveesh Bhandari of Indicus Analytics use the six indicators income poverty (poverty ratios), hunger, infant moratlity rate, immunization, literacy rate and enrollment ratios to come up with a list of 69 backward districts in India. They use the notion that a district is backward if it is in the bottom 25 percentile in at least four of the six indicators. In their list of 69 backward districts [23] there are 10 districts from Orissa. Those are: Balangir, Kalahandi, Koraput, Nawrangpur, Nuapada, Rayagada, Gajapati, Kandhamala , Mayurbhanj, and Sundergarh. Of these the first six are in KBK, the next two are adjacent to KBK,  and the last two are heavily tribal districts bordering Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand and West Bengal.

 

 

 

 

1.2 Government of India’s RSVY and BRGF programs

 

In the RSVY (Rashtriya Sam Vikas Yojana) program started in 2002-03 a list of 100 backward districts [21,22] and another list of 32 extremist affected districts were made. Since there we special plans for KBK (the RLTAP) and Bihar, neither were listed in the 100. The second list of 32 contained three districts from Orissa: Ganjam, Gajapati and Mayubhanj.

 

The RSVY morphed to the BRGF (Backward Region Grant fund) in 2006 and its list of 200 districts included the following 19 districts from Orissa:  1. Bolangir, 2. Boudh, 3. Debagarh, 4. Dhenkanal, 5. Gajapati, 6. Ganjam, 7. Jharsuguda, 8. Kalahandi, 9. Keonjhar, 10. Koraput, 11. Malkangiri, 12. Mayurbhanj, 13. Nabrangpur, 14. Nuapada, 15. Kandhamal (Phulbani), 16. Rayagada, 17. Sambalpur, 18. Sonapur and 19. Sundargarh. The above contains all eight districts of KBK.

 

1.3  Excerpts from “Disparities in national development”

 

Following are some excerpts from the document [20] of the above name available at http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=3

(a) According to the Planning Commission's National Human Development Report: 2001, the percentage of poor people in the state (15.28) was well below the national average. …

From this perspective, India's five 'poorest' states, according to the Planning Commission's 1999-2000 figures, were:

  • Orissa (47.15% of the population was below the poverty line in 1999-2000)
  • Bihar (42. 60%)
  • Madhya Pradesh (37.43%)
  • Sikkim (36.55%), and
  • Assam (36.09%).

(b) For instance, if we look at 1997-98 figures of per capita net state domestic product, we see that … The lowest figures are all from states in the eastern half:

  • Bihar (Rs 1,126)
  • Assam (Rs 1,675)
  • Orissa (Rs 1,666)
  • Uttar Pradesh (Rs 1,725), and
  • Meghalaya (Rs 1,804).

(c) A detailed study of regional disparities in development and poverty was recently conducted by the National Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad. Its report, India Rural Development Report, 1999, throws up several revealing facts: …

The report attempts to identify low poverty, medium poverty, high poverty and very high poverty regions across the country, on the basis of 1993-94 rural poverty ratios. Accordingly, the 'very high poverty' regions of the country with a rural poverty ratio of above 60 are:

  • Southern (undivided) Bihar
  • South-western (undivided) Madhya Pradesh
  • Southern Orissa
  • Southern Uttar Pradesh

The 'high poverty' regions with a rural poverty ratio between 41 and 60 are:

  • Northern and central (undivided) Bihar
  • Central and eastern (undivided) Uttar Pradesh
  • Himalayan and eastern West Bengal
  • Coastal and northern Orissa
  • Southern Rajasthan
  • Hilly and western plain regions of Assam and all parts of the other north-eastern states
  • Central, northern (inland) and eastern parts of Maharashtra
  • Central, southern and Chhattisgarh region of (undivided) Madhya Pradesh
  • Northern coastal region of Tamil Nadu
  • Sikkim
  • Dadra & Nagar Haveli

(d) Causes of backwardness: The India Rural Development Report quoted earlier …

The report also notes:

  • 'Very high poverty' regions across the country in different states have a predominantly tribal population. These regions are rocky and dry yet densely populated because of their agro-climatic conditions.
  • Likewise, 'high poverty' regions of different states have a large tribal population, are thickly populated, semi-arid and have been "historically neglected".

A comprehensive estimation of district-level deprivation made recently by Bibek Debroy of the Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies, New Delhi, and Laveesh Bhandari of Indicus Analytics in District-level Deprivation in the New Millennium (Konark Publishers, New Delhi; 2003), came up with other significant findings:

  • Most highways and rail networks tend to be in areas outside the most backward districts.
  • All the most backward districts lie in low-growth regions.
  • The most backward districts have the lowest presence of trained personnel during deliveries.
  • Districts in eastern India tend to have lower pupil-teacher ratios compared to districts in western India.

 

State-wise poverty lines, number of poor and poverty ratio for the year 1999-2000    

 

No

States

Rural

Urban

Combined

Number of persons*

Poverty ratio

Poverty line**

Number of persons*

Poverty ratio

Poverty line**

Number of persons*

Poverty ratio

1

Andhra Pradesh

58.13

11.05

262.94

60.88

26.63

457.40

119.01

15.77

2

Arunachal Pradesh

3.80

40.04

365.43

0.18

7.47

343.99

3.98

33.47

3

Assam

92.17

40.04

365.43

2.38

7.47

343.99

94.55

36.09

4

Bihar

376.51

44.30

333.07

49.13

32.91

379.78

425.64

42.60

5

Goa

0.11

1.35

318.63

0.59

7.52

539.71

0.70

4.40

6

Gujarat

39.80

13.17

318.94

28.09

15.59

474.41

67.89

14.07

7

Haryana

11.94

8.27

362.81

5.39

9.99

420.20

17.34

8.74

8

Himachal Pradesh

4.84

7.94

367.45

0.29

4.63

420.20

5.12

7.63

9

Jammu and Kashmir

2.97

3.97

367.45

0.49

1.98

420.20

3.46

3.48

10

Karnataka

59.91

17.38

309.59

44.49

25.25

511.44

104.40

20.04

11

Kerala

20.97

9.38

374.79

20.07

20.27

477.06

41.04

12.72

12

Madhya Pradesh

217.32

37.06

311.34

81.22

38.44

481.65

298.54

37.43

13

Maharashtra

125.12

23.72

318.63

102.87

26.81

539.71

227.99

25.02

14

Manipur

6.53

40.04

365.43

0.66

7.47

343.99

7.19

28.54

15

Meghalaya

7.89

40.04

365.43

0.34

7.47

343.99

8.23

33.87

16

Mizoram

1.40

40.04

365.43

0.45

7.47

343.99

1.85

19.47

17

Nagaland

5.21

40.04

365.43

0.28

7.47

343.99

5.49

32.67

18

Orissa

143.69

48.01

323.92

25.40

42.83

473.12

169.09

47.15

19

Punjab

10.20

6.35

362.68

4.29

5.75

388.15

14.49

6.16

20

Rajasthan

55.06

13.74

344.03

26.78

19.85

465.92

81.83

15.28

21

Sikkim

2.00

40.04

365.43

0.04

7.47

343.99

2.05

36.55

22

Tamil Nadu

80.51

20.55

307.64

49.97

22.11

475.60

130.48

21.12

23

Tripura

12.53

40.04

365.43

0.49

7.47

343.99

13.02

34.44

24

Uttar Pradesh

412.01

31.22

336.88

117.88

30.89

416.29

529.89

31.15

25

West Bengal

180.11

31.85

350.17

33.38

14.86

409.22

213.49

27.02

26

Andaman & Nicobar Islands

0.58

20.55

307.64

0.24

22.11

475.60

0.82

20.99

27

Chandigarh

0.06

5.75

388.15

0.45

5.75

388.15

0.51

5.75

28

Dadra & Nagar Haveli

0.30

17.57

318.63

0.03

13.52

539.71

0.33

17.14

29

Daman & Diu

0.01

1.35

318.63

0.05

7.52

539.71

0.06

4.44

30

Delhi

0.07

0.40

362.68

11.42

9.42

505.45

11.49

8.23

31

Lakshadweep

0.03

9.38

374.79

0.08

20.27

477.06

0.11

15.60

32

Pondicherry

0.64

20.55

307.64

1.77

22.11

475.60

2.41

21.67

 

* In lakhs        

** Rs monthly per capita        

Source: Planning Commission, Government of India            

Why 3: LTAP, RLTAP, BRGF needs to be augmented with higher education opportunities.  (mention NSSO data)

In the past two programs targeted for KBK districts have been implemented: LTAP and RLTAP. We reproduce an overview of both programs, their achievements and their failures below.

2.1 LTAP: 1995-96 – 2001-02  (From http://kbk.nic.in/LTAP.htm)

A Long Term Action Plan (LTAP) for the KBK districts was formulated in consultation with the Government of India for a period of seven years from 1995-96 to 2001-2002 with two principal objectives in view: (i) drought and distress proofing, and (ii) poverty alleviation and development saturation. LTAP envisaged an outlay of Rs. Rs.4,557.03 crore. This included Rs.4,167.82 crore as normal flow of funds in sight. A gap of Rs.389.21 crore was projected to be filled up by way of availing additional assistance from Govt. of India. However, a meagre additionality of only Rs.20.49 crore was received from Government of India from 1995-96 to 1997-98 against the State requirement of Rs. 289.71 crore. Therefore, LTAP did not take off for want of availability of sufficient funds. Department-wise, scheme-wise and year-wise allocations and expenditures of the aforesaid additionalities are summarised in Table 4.

Table 4: Department-wise and Scheme-wise Allocations and Expenditures of Additionalities Under LTAP for KBK Districts: 1995-96-1997-98

S.

No.

Depart-ment

Scheme

Allocation & Expenditure of Additionalities  (Rs. in Crore)

Year-wise Allocation

Total

Expdr.

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

Total

1.

Agri.

Fertiliser use*

0.58

--

--

0.58

0.58

Fertiliser use**

0.40

--

--

0.40

0.40

Fruit Dev#

1.16

--

--

1.16

1.16

2.

F.A. R. D.

Ram Development

0.11

--

--

0.11

0.11

Dairy Development

2.00

--

--

2.00

2.00

3.

H & FW

Mobile health Units

4.10

--

2.00

6.10

3.44

4.

W & CD

Emergency Feeding

4.00

--

2.00

6.00

6.83

5.

Rural Dev

Million wells

--

--

4.14

4.14

4.14

Total

12.35

--

8.14

20.49

18.66

     Notes:        *  National Project on development of fertilizer use.   

                       **                Balance & integrated use of fertilizers.

                     #                “Integrated development of tropical, arid zone and temperate fruits” scheme.

2.2 RLTAP : 1998-99 to 2006-07 (From http://kbk.nic.in/RLATP.htm)

A Revised Long Term Action Plan (RLTAP) for the KBK districts was submitted to Government of India on their advice in 1998.  The project was prepared in a sub-plan mode to address the peculiar socio-economic problems of this chronically poor region which is also geographically contiguous.  This project envisages an integrated approach for speeding up the socio-economic development of this region by synergizing effectively the various developmental activities and schemes under implementation both in Central as well as State sectors.  The critical gaps in the development efforts as well as resources are sought to be bridged through Additional Central Assistance (ACA) / Special Central Assistance (SCA) as a special dispensation.  Therefore, there has to be pooling of resources for different sources like: 

 

(i)    Normal flow of funds to KBK districts under Central Plan (CP) and Centrally Sponsored Plan (CSP) schemes

 

(ii)    Additional funds received from Government of India exclusively for programmes in KBK districts as agreed by the Planning Commission

 

(iii)    Central assistance under programmes of Government of India to be implemented in KBK districts with some relaxation in norms such as Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme (AIBP) for earmarked irrigation projects. 

 

 A total outlay of funds to the tune of Rs. 6,251.08 crore over a project period of 9 years from 1998-99 to 2006-07 is envisaged under the revised project.  A scheme-wise abstract of projected outlay for RLTAP for KBK districts from 1998-99 to 2006-07 is given in Table below.

   

Projected Outlay for RLTAP for KBK Districts for the Period

From 19998-99 to 2006-07

Sl

No.

Scheme

Projected Outlay (Rupees in crore)

Grand Total (Rupees

In crore)

Central Plan (CP)

Centrally Sponsored Plan (CSP) Shares

Total Central Share

Total State Share

Central

State

1

Agriculture

44.74

30.19

10.01

74.93

10.01

84.94

2

Horticulture

66.17

6.35

1.62

72.52

1.62

74.14

3

Watershed Development

601.90

194.96

81.42

796.86

81.42

878.28

4

Afforestation

347.83

14.11

14.11

361.94

14.11

376.05

5

Rural Employment

-

2,235.05

558.76

2235.05

558.76

2,793.81

6

Irrigation

812.11

-

-

812.11

-

812.11

7

Health

150.95

-

-

150.95

-

150.95

8

Emergency Feeding

88.50

-

-

88.50

-

88.50

9

Drinking Water Supply

-

67.74

67.74

67.74

67.74

135.48

10

Rural Connectivity

-

534.70

65.00

534.70

65.00

599.70

11

Welfare of ST/SC

257.12

-

-

257.12

-

257.12

Total

2,369.32

3,083.10

798.66

5,452.42

798.66

6,251.08

            The objectives of the RLTAP are:

          *          drought proofing,

          *          poverty alleviation and development saturation, and

          *          improved quality of life for local people.

 

An additional assistance from Government of India to the extent of Rs. 1,312.20 crore was projected for the first four years of RLTAP.  However, State Government have been receiving ad hoc additional assistance from Government of India to bridge gaps in resources available for critical sectors on year to year basis.  The additional assistance requested by the State Government and additionality sanctioned by Government of India from 1998-99 to 2001-02 .are given in Table below.

 

    Requirement of Additionalities by the State Government and the ACA and AIBP Funds Sanctioned by Govt. of India during 1998-99 to 2001-02

Year

Additional Assistance (Rs. in Crore)

Requirement Posed by State Govt.

                     

Sanctioned by Govt. of India

ACA

AIBP

Total

1998-99

307.19

46.00

0.00

46.00

1999-00

307.34

57.60

45.00

102.60

2000-01

341.74

40.35

60.00

100.35

2001-02

355.93

100.00

100.00

200.00

TOTAL

1312.2 0

243.95

205 .00

448.95

 

During the first four years of RLTAP, i.e., from 1998-99 to 2001-02, the Government of India released funds to the extent of Rs.1393.99 crore ( CP/CSP: Rs. 988.16 crore;  ACA:    Rs. 243.95 crore; and AIBP: 161.88 crore ) under RLTAP for KBK districts against which Rs.1042.44 crore ( CP/CSP: Rs. 709.07 crore; ACA: Rs. 187.60 crore; and AIBP: Rs. 145.77 crore ) have been utilized.  Consolidated information with regard to release and utilisation of funds in the KBK districts under CP/CSP, ACA & AIBP for the period from 1998-99 to 2001-02 are summarised in Table below.    

 

   Consolidated Information on Release & Utilisation of CP, CSP, SP and ACA Funds in KBK Districts: 1998-99 – 2001-02

S.

No.

Funding Mechanism

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

Release

Expendr

Release

Expendr

Release

Expendr

Release

Expendr

(Rupees in crore)

1

CP/CSP

267.53

211.65

202.13

150.20

216.66

172.01

301.84

175.21

2

ACA (RLTAP)

46.00

13.17

57.60

55.91

40.35

57.14

100.00

61.38

3

AIBP (RLTAP)

.00

.00

40.40

46.11

49.82

44.97

71.66

54.69

Total

313.53

224.82

300.13

252.22

306.83

274.12

473.5 0

291.28

 

2.3 Excerpts from the “Report of Tour of the KBK districts on 19th-20th July 2005”

 

This report is authored by Chandra Pal, Adviser (MLP), A. Sekhar, Adviser (Water Resources) and Sugan Singh, Director (Transport). Following are some excerpts from this report.

 

Sri Sugan Singh, Director Transport made the following observations:

- 

-   Railways poorly connect the KBK districts and this issue needs serious consideration by the ministry of railways.

 

Chandra Pal’s observations include:

 

-   There are only 9302 primary schools in the KBK districts.  It means that most of the villages do not even have primary schools. Similarly, there are 2571 upgraded primary schools and only 1018 high schools.

 

-   All these schools are run by Mass Education Department and ST & SC Development Department.  Total number of schools run by ST & SC Development Department is only 550.  It seems that the responsibility of education of ST & SC population is on the SC & ST Development Department. The number of schools run by this department is highly insufficient for 55% of the SC/ST population of the districts.

 

-   Total number of ITIs and polytechnics / engineering schools in the KBK districts are only 17 out of which 7 institutions are Government institutions and 10 are private institutions.  This number is highly insufficient.

 

-   Employment opportunities for younger people are very less in these districts. There is also lack of infrastructure for vocational training and coaching cum guidance centers.

 

Chandra Pal’s recommendations with respect to Education/Training were as follows:

 

a) There is an urgent need for establishing an agricultural college in KBK region for imparting education in agricultural practices. It could be a government-private venture. One time subsidy may also be given to a private person to establish the institute.

 

b)  There should be a school say up to the 7th standard in every village.  Such schools should have the scope of up gradation up to the high school level.  Running the schools in two shifts can do this.  Morning shift can be run up to the 7th Standard and evening shift up to the high school level.  This way, education can be given to all the population particularly all the SC/ST population. Local educated youth should be employed in these schools to reduce the problem of non-availability of teachers.

 

c)  There was a need of good quality ITIs for imparting employable skill to the unemployed youth for creating employment opportunities for them within and outside the State.   Such institutions should have at least 75% seats for SC/ST students keeping in view their population in the region. These funds should come from special component plan meant for SC/ST welfare.  25% seats should be for others funds for which will come from general pool.

 

d)  The statistics of Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste youths who have already completed graduation level studies and are aspirant of their employment in different sectors should be collected and tried to be accommodated in government jobs, if not, they must be trained for quality self employment through vocational training.

 

e)  Each block headquarter should have an educational institute consisting of a residential intermediate college/ sports college with provision for future expansion. There should also be a vocational college and coaching guidance center in the same campus.

 

f)  There is a need for providing a medical training centers for nurses, ANMs, physiotherapists, technicians, radiologists etc  in each district.

 

g)  The buildings and roads constructed in the KBK districts appear to be costly and there is a need for taking of a consensus decision to create economical road and building infrastructures in these districts.  This would release some funds for other activities such as creation of employable skills among unemployed youths and for good quality primary and  +2 level education of the students of deprived communities

 

Many of the above recommendations can be adequately taken care of by the establishment of a comprehensive KBK Central University as envisioned in this document.

 

Why 4:  KBK + Gajapati and Kandhamal have a very high tribal [12-14] population. The best way to provide higher education access to STs is to create good higher education institution in areas where STs live.

 

In this regard an example from the USA is illuminating.  The USA has affirmative action programs for sub-groups such as Blacks and Hispanics. Although, all universities in the US practice affirmative action, the USA also has (i) several Historical Black Colleges and

Universities (HBCUs), primarily located where there is a significant Black population and (ii) several large universities located in areas with large Hispanic population. The key here is that these universities are located where the people it is meant to serve live. Following are some of the impact of these institutions that we gleaned from the web sites [16,17] http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq9511.html  and

http://www.hispanicoutlook.com/top100.htm

 

  • More than 80 percent of all black Americans who received degrees in medicine and dentistry were trained at the two traditionally black institutions of medicine and dentistry--Howard University and Meharry Medical College. (Today, these institutions still account for 19.7 percent of degrees awarded in medicine and dentistry to black students.)

 

  • HBCUs have provided undergraduate training for three fourths of all black persons holding a doctorate degree; three fourths of all black officers in the armed forces; and four fifths of all black federal judges.

 

  • Fifty percent of black faculty in traditionally white research universities received their bachelor's degrees at an HBCU.

 

Similarly, the top ten colleges that award degrees to Hispanics are:

 

1 FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY                FL

2 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS-PAN AMERICAN       TX

3 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO    TX

            4 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-FULLERTON    CA

            5 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-NORTHRIDGE  CA

6 CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY-LONG BEACH  CA

            7 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO               TX

            8 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN                 TX

            9 SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY                                CA

            10 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES       CA

 

These ten universities are all located in states, cities and neighborhoods with high Hispanic population. For example, FIU is in Miami which has 66% Hispanic population. UT Pan American is in the Rio Grande Valley and has 80-92% Hispanic population.

 

Similarly, the news item [37] http://www.reznetnews.org/student/061109_dinecollege/ reports that “the Diné College graduates more Native Americans with an associate's degree than any college in the country, according to Community College Week, a biweekly magazine for two-year colleges.”  

 

The following picture shows the various locations of this college. We obtained it from the site [38] https://www.dinecollege.edu/images/Maps/DCLocationMap.jpg. We have a very similar model in mind for the proposed KBK Central University. It will be spread across the KBk districts and the adjacent districts of Gajapati and Kandhamala. These are the districts which have a large tribal percentage and a university to benefit them should be located here and should have campuses in small towns across these districts.

 

In addition one must note that there are more than fifty native American colleges in the United states and Canada [39]. Many of these colleges are multi-campus ones.  Hence, India with a much larger number of tribal population and backward area clusters should not just think of one Tribal university for all of them. They should think of one each for each backward and tribal district cluster.

 

 

 

With respect to India, the planning commission and the previous HRD ministries rightly invested in the higher education of the north eastern states through central universities and the results, of higher education enrollment (see table below) are there for everyone to see.

 

From the NSSO [5] figures of Table 3.14.1 about attendance rates among 15-19 year olds and 20-24 year olds in the Northeastern states we have the following:

 

State

Attendance among 15-19 yr olds

Attendance among 20-24 yr olds

Arunachal Pradesh

61.1%

22.6%

Assam

53.2%

12.8%

Manipur

79.8%

44.3%

Meghalaya

52.6%

14.3%

Mizoram

68.7%

20.8%

Nagaland

79.9%

32.7%

Sikkim

68.7%

20.9%

Tripura

59.6%

11.9%

Orissa

29.0%

6.1%

Now that five of the eight north-eastern states (Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland) have central universities and the HRD minister is reported [40] on January 12, 2006 to have said that "Central Universities for Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Tripura are on the anvil," one must look at the backward and super backward regions of the country where the higher education situation is dismal. A similar approach needs to be taken with respect to these backward and heavily tribal district clusters of the rest of India, starting with the establishment of a central university for the KBK district cluster in the 11th plan.

 

Why 5: Orissa has no central university, no IIT, IIM, IISc, ISI, or any similar institution of national importance fully funded by the HRD ministry of India.

 

From Table 6.5 of the Moily Committee report [34] we list the various fully centrally funded institutions. (We do not include the medical ones as recently 6 AIIMS-like institutions have been proposed for 6 backward states including one for Orissa.)

 

Agriculture (5): 

            Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi

            Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar

            Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Mumbai

            National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal

            Central Agricultural University Imphal

 

Management (7):

IIMs at  Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Bangalore, Lucknow, Indore, Kozhikode

NITIE. Mumbai

 

IITs/IISc/IISERs (10+ 3 new IITs and 3 new IISERs)

            IITs at Kharagpur, Kanpur, Guwahati, Delhi, Mumbai, Channai, Roorkee

                        (3 more are reported to have been approved for the 11th plan)

            IISc Bangalore

IISER Kolkata, Pune (announced at Punjab and two others are reported to be established in Central and South India, respectively)[4]

 

NITs (20+1 to be upgraded): One of them in Rourkela, Orissa.

Allahbad, Bhopal, Calicut, Durgapur, Hamirpur, Jaipur, Jalandhar, Kurukshetra, Nagpur, Patna, Raipur, Rourkela, Silchar, Srinagar, Surat, Surathkal, Tiruchirapalli, Warangal, Agartala (Manipur Inst of Tech is to be upgraded to an NIT.)      

 

Other Central Government Tech. Institutions (11 + 2 proposed SPAs):

            NITTRs: Chandigarh, Kolkata, Chennai, Bhopal,

            NIFFT  Ranchi

            IIIT : Allhabad, Gwalior, Jabalpur

            SPA New Delhi (2 others are reported to have been approved for the 11th plan)

            ISM Dhanbad

            SLIET, Punjab

 

 

Central Universities:

 

Part A (12): BHU, University of Delhi, Hyderabad University, JMI, JNU, Pondicherry University, Visva Bharati, Assam University, Tezpur University, MA National Urdu University, MG Antarashtriya Hindi Vishwavidyalaya, University of Allahbad.

 

Part B (5+3 on the anvil): NEHU, Nagaland University, Mizoram University, Ambedkar University, Manipur University. (Three more in Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Tripura have been announced as being “on the anvil.”)

 

Institutions of National Importance [46]: The institutions of national importance include   the  6 IIMs, the 7 IITs and IISc Bangalore from the above list and in addition includes PGIMER Chandigarh, AIIMS Delhi, NIPER Mohali, Dakshina Bharti Hindi Prachar Sabha Chennai and ISI Kolkata. Five institutions, Bengal engineering College, IT BHU, Andhra University Engineering College in Visakhapatnam, Osmania University Engineering College in Hyderabad and CUSAT in Cochin are in the process of being upgraded to IIESTs and institutions of national importance.

 

As evident from the above list, the only institution that the HRD ministry fully funds in Orissa is the NIT Rourkela, one of the 20 NITs. Other than that the HRD ministry has completely forgotten Orissa and Orissa has no IITs/IISc, no IIM, no central universities, and above all no institutions of national importance.

 

Thus with 17 already established Central Universities and 3 more already announced, any new additional central university must and should include the KBK Central University. In addition, with 19 already established institutions of national importance and at least 5(IIEST) + 3(IIT) more on the way, one of the three proposed new IITs should also be in Orissa, in particular in the backward South Orissa.

 

Conclusion:

 

We conclude by quoting from the Planning Commission’s approach paper to the 11th Five year plan [41]. Addressing higher education it says (among additional paragraphs):

 

India has a well developed higher education system which has served us well thus far, but is now subject to serious strain. The extent of access it provides is limited. Only about 8% of the relevant age group go to university whereas in many developing countries, the

figure is between 20 and 25%. There is clearly a need to undertake major expansion.  There is also a serious problem of quality.  While some of our institutions of higher education compare well with the best in the world, the average standard is much lower. Disturbingly, the high quality institutions are finding it difficult to get faculty of suitable quality given the enormous increase in opportunities in the private sector for many of the skills most in demand. The 11th Plan must undertake a major effort to expand capacity in our institutions while also improving quality. Unless this done, we will run into skill constraints which will limit our ability to exploit this important area of competitive advantage?

 

New colleges and universities must be set up, to provide easier access to students in educationally backward districts. Existing institutions must be strengthened and expanded where possible and open and distance education encouraged.  In addition, a specific plan for upgrading a few "existing" select universities with "potential for excellence" will be formulated laying down specific parameters which are in tune with global standards. At least 20 universities, with the potential for excellence, may be upgraded in the 11th Plan period.

 

We sincerely request the planning commission, to honor its word above and establish a KBK Central university [2] with multiple campuses across the KBK region during the 11th plan period. [5]

 

 

References:

 

[1] Orissa HDR 2004 (especially Chapter 8)  http://www.undp.org.in/hdrc/shdr/Orissa/

[2] KBK Central Blog http://www.kbkcentral.blogspot.com

[3] Official website of KBK http://kbk.nic.in/main.htm

[4] Report of Tour of the KBK Districts (19th-20th July 2005) http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/sp_kbktour.pdf

[5] NSS Report No. 516: Emloyment and unemployment situation among social groups in India. 2004-2005. Available from http://mospi.nic.in/

[6]District-Level Deprivation in the New Millenium. Edited by Bibek Debroy and Laveesh Bhandari.

[7] Fifth Schedule Areas http://www.mmpindia.org/Fifth_Schedule.htm

[8] Center proposes tribal varsity. http://www.hindu.com/2006/11/19/stories/2006111900750900.htm

[9] PRESS RELEASE OF 24/10/2005(CM MET UNION MINISTER FOR HRD..... ) http://rc.orissa.gov.in/index3.asp?linkid=30&sublinkid=133

[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_national_university

[11] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefectures_of_Japan

[12] Tribal areas of Orissa: http://tribal.nic.in/orissastareas.html

[13] Tribes of Orissa: http://tribal.nic.in/orrissa.html

[14] Statewise tribal population of India: http://tribal.nic.in/indiamap.html

[15] Delhi University Colleges and Departments: http://www.du.ac.in/index.html;

http://www.du.ac.in/collegesmain.htm; http://www.du.ac.in/maps/coins.htm

[16] Accomplishments of HBCUs (Historically Black Colleges and Universities) http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq9511.html

[17] Top colleges awarding degress to Hispanics: http://www.hispanicoutlook.com/top100.htm

[18] Schemes of the ministry of Tribal Welfare: http://tribal.nic.in/index1.html;

http://tribal.nic.in/tribalwelfare1.html

[19] India’s poorest districts: http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=4

[20] Disparity in National development: http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=3

[21] India’s most backward districts: List of 1997 Sarma Committee. http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=19

[22] Planning Commission’s list of 100 backward districts for RSVY programme http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=20

[23] India’s 69 most backward districts: Report of Bibek Debroy and Laveesh Bhandari

http://www.empowerpoor.com/backgrounder.asp?report=21

[24] Long Term Action Plan (LTAP): http://kbk.nic.in/LTAP.htm

[25] Revised Long Term Action Plan (RLTAP): http://kbk.nic.in/RLATP.htm

[26] Background of KBK: http://kbk.nic.in/background.htm

[27] Common features of KBK Districts: http://kbk.nic.in/Commonfeatures.htm

[28] Families below BPL in KBK: Table 7 of http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/sp_kbktour.pdf

[29] Literacy in KBK: Table 3 of http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/stateplan/sp_kbktour.pdf

[30] List of Central Universities http://www.ugc.ac.in/inside/utype.php?st=Central%20University

[31] Central University: Union Government ignores Orissa again. http://orissamatters.com/news/index.php/2005/11/13/central-university/

[32] When the weakest, poorest are able to empower the nation. Naveen Patnaik.

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=81314

[33] News item on CM Naveen Patnaik discussing KBK Central University with HRD Minister Mr. Arjun Singh. http://www.baral.us/orissa/pdf/2005-oct24-statesman.pdf

[34] Report of the Oversight Committee to Monitor implementation of Reservation in Higher Educational Institutions. Pages 84-86. (Moily Committee Report) Available from http://planningcommission.nic.in/

[35] http://pib.nic.in/release/rel_print_page.asp?relid=19759

[36] http://pib.nic.in/release/rel_print_page1.asp?relid=19785

[37] Article about Dine College graduating more Native Americans with an associate's degree than any college in the country. http://www.reznetnews.org/student/061109_dinecollege/

[38] Dine College Locations: https://www.dinecollege.edu/ics/Academics/Dine_College_Location.jnz

[39] Native American Colleges and Schools: http://www.hanksville.org/NAresources/indices/NAcollege.html

[40] Center gives priority to Education in Northeast. January 12, 2006 News Item. http://arunachaleducation.net/news/

[41] Towards Faster and More Inclusive Growth. An approach to the Eleventh

Five Year Plan, 2007-2012. http://planningcommission.nic.in/plans/planrel/11appdrft/11app_eng.pdf

[42] Dr. D. Swaminadhan (dsrf@ap.nic.in) Committee set up by the University Grants Commission, recommended the setting up of a varsity exclusively for promoting tribal culture and providing tribals access to higher education.

[43] Moily committee recommendations worsen inequity. http://chitta.googlepages.com/moilycommitteerecommendationworsensinequity

[44] Center for promoting an equitable India. http://equitableindia.org/

[45] State wise distribution of HRD National Highways funding in India: a preliminary report   (Jan 20, 2006) http://www.baral.us/hrd-nh.htm

[46] List of Institutions of National Importance: http://www.ugc.ac.in/inside/utype.php?st=Institute%20of%20National%20Importance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



[1] Most schools in the KBK districts do not have enough teachers. This can be alleviated by having locally produced teachers. In other words for the K-12 initiatives to succeed, there is a need for adequate qualified and dedicated local teachers, and a central university will significantly help in that. Thus K-12 initiatives and higher education initiatives such as a central university need to go hand in hand.

[2] Money assigned for the backward districts are often not spent properly as many officers do not want to live in the backward districts like KBK. Teachers, doctors and other professionals appointed or transferred to these districts often lobby in the state capitals to change their transfer and appointment and many do not join their posting in these districts.

[3] We do not know when exactly the idea of a national tribal university [8,42] covering the fifth schedule areas [7] was mooted in the HRD ministry. But it is on record [9,33] that the Chief Minister of Orissa (CMO) [32] met the HRD minister Mr. Arjun Singh in October 2005 and on 24th October 2005 a PR (http://rc.orissa.gov.in/index3.asp?linkid=30&sublinkid=133) was issued regarding the CMO having raised the establishment of a KBK Central University with the HRD minister. The relevant portion of the PR is as follows: “In addition to this, Shri Patnaik also requested for establishment of a Central University for the KBK Region, which is one of the most backward regions in the country. He pointed out that there was a heavy concentration of the scheduled tribe and scheduled caste population in this region, which has a literacy rate below 50%. Shri Patnaik stated that setting up a Central University in the KBK region would go a long way in encouraging higher education among tribal population. He added that the university could also set up specialized centres for tribal development related studies, as tribal development was one of the biggest challenges facing the country today. Shri. Arjun Singh appreciated the rationale of having a Central University in the KBK region and sought a formal proposal in this regard from the State Government. He assured that this would receive high priority whenever the Central Government considers setting up of new central universities.”

[4] A DAE funded NISER has been announced for Bhubaneswar, Orissa.

[5] In addition we also request them that one of the three proposed new IITs, targeted to be established in backward areas, should be established in a location close to these KBK districts. We suggest the location of Berhampur, which is in South Orissa, in the district of Ganjam (a backward district) and yet is well connected by train to the rest of the country. This location of a new IIT will benefit both the backward region and yet it will be accessible enough to sustain quality faculty and attract research and development.