ISSN: 0974-438X
Imapct factor(SJIF): 5.889

Home | About Us| Invitation For Manuscript| Review Process| Indexing| Subscription | Disclaimer

 

 

PBRI is now indexed in ESCI by THOMSON REUTERS.

 
Editorial Board A Refereed Monthly International Journal of Management
Prof. B. P. Sharma
(Editor in Chief)
Prof. Mahima Birla
(Editor)
Prof. Harshita Shrimali
(Consultative Editor)
Dr. Khushbu Agarwal
(Additional Editor)
Ms. Asha Galundia
(Circulation Manager)

 Editorial Team

Dr. Devendra Shrimali
Dr. Dharmesh Motwani
Mr. Jinendra Vyas
 
Go to back

Inter District Disparities of Social Infrastructure in Punjab: A Comparative Study of Pre- and Post Reform Period

Avinash Kaur Dr. Rajinder Kaur

Research Scholar Professor

Department Of Commerce Department Of Commerce

Punjabi University, Patiala Punjabi University, Patiala

Sidhu.avinash@yahoo.com

9501631088

Inter District Disparities of Social Infrastructure in Punjab: A Comparative Study of Pre- and Post-Reform Period.

Abstract

Infrastructure is the pre-requisite for the development of any economy. Infrastructure is the backbone of any economy. Unless adequate and proper infrastructure, there can’t be sustainable development. The study analyses the inter district disparities in social infrastructure in Punjab for the period from 1981 to 2011 in order to compare pre- reform (1981-1991) and post-reform (2001-2011) changes. The study undertook variables, namely number of educational institutions, number of teachers in educational institutions, number of medical institutions, number of beds in medical institutions, number of hospitals, number of dispensaries and number of Primary Health Centres. The study found that inter district disparities do exist in all these variables during the period and the disparity has increased from pre-reform period to post-reform period. The study concluded that inter district disparities can be eradicated by investing in both public and private sectors. More investment in the social sectors like education, health services and other development activities is the need of the hour.

Keywords: Punjab, Infrastructure, Economic Development, Social Infrastructure.

Introduction

Infrastructure is a basic physical and organizational structure required for the operation of a society or enterprise, or the services and facilities necessary for an economy to function. It can be generally defined as the set of interconnected structure elements that provide the framework supporting an entire structure of development. It is an important term for judging a country or region’s development. The word is a combination of two Latin words infra meaning “beneath” and structural meaning “to construct.” Infrastructure is an umbrella term for several activities. These include public works like railways, roads; major irrigation works etc. and also public utilities like power, telecommunication, tap water supply, sanitation and sewerage etc. The infrastructure term also includes facilities pertaining to health, education, skill formation, etc. These activities are necessary for the working of an economy. Infrastructure is categorized into two types: Economic Infrastructure and Social Infrastructure.

  • Economic Infrastructure is defined as the infrastructure that helps in promoting economic activities such as roads, highways, railroads, airports, seaports, electricity, telecommunications, water supply and sanitation.
  • Social Infrastructure ( such as schools, libraries, universities, clinics, hospitals, courts, museums, theatres, parks, fountains and statues) is defined as the infrastructure that helps in promoting the health, education and cultural standards of the population – activities that have both direct and indirect impacts on the welfare.

Types of Infrastructure


Economic Infrastructure Social Infrastructure

(i) Irrigation and Power (i) Education

(ii) Transport (ii) Health, sanitation and water supply

(iii) Communication (iii) Housing

Social infrastructure is a subset of the infrastructure sector and generally includes the assets which accommodate social services. Social Infrastructure means those basic activities which not only help in achieving social objectives, but also indirectly help in attaining various economic activities. For example, education does not directly help in economic activities such as production and distribution, but indirectly helps in the economic development of the country by providing scientists, technologists and engineers. So the examples of social infrastructure are education, health services, sanitation and water supply etc.

Review of Literature

Dadibhavi (1991) analyzed the disparities in social infrastructure in the states during the period 1970-71 to 1984-85 by using educational and health facilities as indicators and opined that over the years there had been a remarkable progress in the development of social infrastructure facilities. Purohit and Tasleem (1994) analyzed the utilization of health services in India from various angles. It was found that the level of utilization was higher in states with higher in states with higher per capita Governmental expenditure on health care, while the states with lower per capita governmental expenditure depicted lower levels of utilization. Joshi (2006) analyzed the expenditures incurred by the Central and State Governments on social sector during the pre-reform period and post-reform period. The study found that there had been a rise in health expenditure from 0.8% of GDP in 1980-81 to 0.92% in 1989-90 (i.e during pre-reform period). Kumar and Gupta (2012) made an attempt to study health infrastructure in India and the impact of National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) initiated by the central government. The study found that government is required to take an integrated approach, which must take into consideration meeting the regional differences. Kumar and Singla (2013) analyzed the regional inter- state disparities to observe the pattern of economic performance across 15 major Indian states for pre –reform and post reform period i.e 1980-81 to 2010-11. The study revealed that regional disparities had reduced in indicators such as GSDP growth rate,cash – deposit ratio, literacy rate and population growth rate from pre- reform period (1980-81) to post –reform period (2010-11). Chotia and Chaudhry (2014) investigated the inter-relationship between regional infrastructure, poverty and economic growth in Rajasthan. The study found that Jaipur held the edge over the other districts of Rajasthan in indicators like roads per sq.km of area, number of census houses per sq.km, percentage of villages connected with roads etc.

Objective of the study

· To analyze the inter district disparities of social infrastructure in Punjab for the pre- (1981-1991) and post-reform periods 2001-2011).

Database and Methodology

The study is carried out by using the secondary data. The secondary data on different variables is taken from various issues of the Statistical Abstract of Punjab. In order to study inter district disparities, 12 districts i.e. Gurdaspur, Amritsar, Kapurthala, Jalandhar, Hoshiarpur, Rupnagar, Ludhiana, Firozpur, Faridkot, Bathinda, Sangrur and Patiala are taken for study for the period 1981-2011.

Inter District Disparities of Social Infrastructure

For this study mainly education and health sectors are taken. The indicators of social infrastructure used to compare inter district disparities are number of educational institutions, a number of teachers in educational institutions, number of medical institutions, number of beds in medical institutions, number of dispensaries, number of hospital and number of Primary Health Centers.

1. Number of educational institutions : Education plays an important role in shaping lives and life styles. Thus, education is a pre-requisite for progress and development in economy. The educational institutions are categorized into (a) High Schools, (b) Middle schools and (c) Primary Schools.

1.(a) Number of high schools and teachers in high schools: Table 1.1 shows that during pre-reform period the number of high schools increased in all the districts. The highest growth in number of high schools has recorded in Gurdaspur (25%) followed by Ferozpur (24.10%), Amritsar(22.92%) and Patiala (22%) and the number of teachers in high schools during the same period also increased in all the districts depicting highest growth in Sangrur (136.49%), followed by Ferozpur (101.57%) and Rupnagar (98.42%). The table shows that the number of teachers in high schools grew at higher rate than in number of schools during pre-reform period.

Table 1.1 Number of High Schools and Teachers in High school

Pre-reform period

Post-Reform Period

Number of high schools

Number of teachers in high schools

Number of high schools

Number of teachers in high schools

District

1981

1991

Growth Rate (%)

1981

1991

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate (%)

Gurdaspur

144

180

25

1489

2863

92.27

183

303

65.57

2736

3823

39.72

Amritsar

205

252

22.92

2005

3071

53.16

240

221

-7.91

3339

2797

-16.23

Kapurthala

74

81

9.45

692

1189

71.82

79

91

15.18

985

1814

84.16

Jalandhar

224

270

20.53

2664

3748

40.69

192

147

-23.43

2783

2566

-7.79

Hoshiarpur

171

193

12.86

1578

2818

78.58

178

200

12.35

2344

4684

99.82

Rupnagar

104

114

9.61

951

1887

98.42

117

87

-25.64

1882

1013

-46.17

Ludhiana

220

262

19.09

1963

3869

97.09

225

367

63.11

3238

3652

12.78

Ferozpur

112

139

24.10

1013

2042

101.57

133

196

47.36

1759

2278

29.50

Faridkot

183

218

19.13

1614

3100

92.07

53

79

49.05

874

1094

25.17

bathinda

145

160

10.34

1362

2366

73.71

117

148

26.49

1962

1961

-0.050

Sangrur

173

197

13.87

1329

3143

136.49

183

180

-1.63

2573

1998

-22.34

Patiala

150

183

22

1606

2726

69.73

148

174

17.56

2319

2218

-4.35

Mean

158.75

187.42

1522.17

2735.17

154

182.75

2232.83

2491.5

SD

46.65

58.38

529.88

767.15

56.55

85.95

783.33

1098.30

CV(%)

29.38

31.15

34.81

28.04

36.72

47.03

35.08

44.08

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues

Thus during pre-reform period Sangrur shows growth rate of 13.87% in number of high schools whereas growth rate of teachers is 136.49% which is approximately ten times more than number of high schools. Similarly the number of high schools in Rupnagar recorded growth of 9.61% and number of teachers showed growth of 98.42%.The mean value of number of high schools and during pre-reform period in 1981 and 1991is 158.75 and 187.42 respectively, registering a variation of 29.38% to 31.15% however the mean value of number of teachers in high schools during 1981 and 1991 is 1522.17 and 2735.17 respectively recording a variation of 34.81% and 28.04% respectively. However during post-reform period the number of high schools increased in some of the districts while some of the districts showed negative growth such as Amritsar (-7.91%), Jalandhar (-23.43%), Rupnagar (-25.64%) and Sangrur (-1.63%).The highest growth in number of high schools is recorded in Gurdaspur (65.57%), followed by Ludhiana (63.11%), Faridkot (49.05%) and Ferozpur (47.36%). It is observed that the districts which showed negative growth in number of high schools also showed negative growth in number of teachers in high schools except Bathinda and Patiala which revealed positive growth of 26.49% and 17.56% respectively in number of schools and corresponding growth of number of teachers is -0.050% and -4.35% respectively.The mean value of number of high schools during post-reform period has increased from 154 to 182.75 in 2001 and 2011 respectively showing a variation of 36.72% and 47.03%. However the mean value of number of teachers in high schools in 2001 and 2011 is 2232.83 and 2491.5 respectively registering a variation of 35.08% and 44.08%.

1 (b) Number of middle schools and teachers in middle schools : Table 1.2 shows that during pre-reform period the number of middle schools showed highest growth in Amritsar (8.69%), followed by Ferozpur (7.09%), Bathinda (1.94%) and Kapurthala (1.56%) whereas all other districts showed negative growth viz. Ludhiana (-16.42%), Rupnagar (-12.32), Jalandhar (-11.42%), Faridkot (-11.38%), Sangrur (-10.81%) and Patiala (-9.42%).Whereas the number of teachers decreased in all the districtsduring pre-reform period showing negative growth in Sangrur (-76.56%), Ludhiana (-73.90%), Rupnagar (70.45%) and Jalandhar (69.23%). The mean value of number of middle schools during pre-reform period is 125.16 in 1981 and 119.16 in 1991 registering a variation of 26.81% and 28.31%. Similarly the mean value of number of teachers in middle schools is 2326.75 in 1981 and 867 in 1991 depicting a variation of 26.60% and 46.31% respectively. However, during post reform period the number of middle schools increased in all the districts except in Jalandhar and Sangrur showing negative growth -7.57% and -9.49% respective.The highest growth in number of middle schools is observed in Gurdaspur (90.03%) followed by Rupnagar (62.93%), Ludhiana (54.80%), Hoshiarpur (49.46%) and Kapurthala (33.03%). The number of teachers also increased during this period showing highest growth in Hoshiarpur (147.66) followed by Kapurthala (104.91%) and Gurdaspur (81.93%) whereas districts like Amritsar (-2.58%), Rupnagar (-2.19%) and Sangrur (-24.07%) showed negative growth. During post-reform period it is noticed that although the districts like Amritsar, Kapurthala, Ferozpur and Bathinda showed positive growth in number of middle schools.

Table 1.2 Number of Middle Schools and Teachers in Middle Schools

Pre-reform period

Post-Reform Period

Number of middle schools

Number of teachers in middle schools

Number of middle schools

Number of teachers in middle school

District

1981

1991

Growth Rate

1981

1991

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

Gurdaspur

136

136

-

2330

931

-60.04

251

477

90.03

1561

2840

81.93

Amritsar

161

175

8.69

3234

1011

-68.73

270

294

8.88

1705

1661

-2.58

Kapurthala

64

65

1.56

1193

380

-68.14

112

149

33.03

570

1168

104.91

Jalandhar

175

155

-11.42

2873

884

-69.23

198

183

-7.57

1124

1726

53.55

Hoshiarpur

137

129

-5.83

2752

927

-66.31

186

278

49.46

1112

2754

147.66

Rupnagar

73

64

-12.32

1577

466

-70.45

116

189

62.93

821

803

-2.19

Ludhiana

140

117

-16.42

3024

789

-73.90

208

322

54.80

1329

1974

48.53

Ferozpur

141

151

7.09

1920

1172

-38.95

210

311

48.09

1154

1599

38.56

Faridkot

123

109

-11.38

2199

669

-69.57

96

106

10.41

586

643

9.72

bathinda

103

105

1.94

1786

705

-60.52

115

155

-34.78

853

949

11.25

Sangrur

111

99

-10.81

2390

560

-76.56

179

162

-9.49

1055

801

-24.07

Patiala

138

125

-9.42

2643

1910

-27.73

167

217

29.94

1057

1060

0.28

Mean

125.16

119.16

2326.75

867

175.66

236.92

1077.55

1498.16

SD

32.77

33.73

618.96

401.51

56.51

103.62

345.91

738.29

CV(%)

26.18

28.31

26.60

46.31

32.71

43.73

32.11

49.27

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues.

But the number of teachers in middle schools revealed negative growth in these districts. It is observed from the table that in Sangrur during post-reform period both, number of middle schools and number of teachers in middle schools showed negative growth rate of -9.49% and -24.07% respectively.Whereas Jalandhar and Bathinda showed negative growth of number of middle schools of -7.57% and -34.78% respectively but showed positive growth of 53.55% and 11.25% of number of teachers in middle schools respectively.On the other hand, Amritsar showed positive growth of 8.88% in number of middle schools but recorded negative growth of -2.58% in number of teachers in middle schools.The mean value of number of middle schools during post-reform period is 175.66 in 2001 and 236.92 in 2011 revealing variation of 32.71% and 43.73% respectively. However, the mean value of number of teachers in middle schools during 2001 was 1077.55 and 1498.16 during 2011 registering variation of 32.11% and 49.27%.

1(c) Number of primary schools and number of teachers in primary schools: Table 1.3 shows that during the pre-reform period the number of primary schools increased in the districts of Ludhiana (1.58%), Ferozpur (0.35%), Bathinda (7.37%) and Patiala (0.078%) showing positive growth, but the number of primary schools decreased in other districts like Gurdaspur (-1.43%), Amritsar (-3.22%), Hoshiarpur (-0.62%) and so on. The number of teachers in primary schools during pre-reform period also decreased showing negative growth except Faridkot (3.31%) and Bathinda (0.77%) which show positive growth.The mean value of number of primary schools during pre-reform period is 1031.91 and 1031.58 in 1981 and 1991 with a variation of 31.51% and 30.11% respectively, whereas the mean value of number of teachers in primary schools is 4234.66 in 1981 and 3997.83 registering a variation of 33.70% and 32.05%. During post reform period, the number of primary schools increased in Kapurthala, Jalandhar, Hoshiarpur, Ludhiana , Ferozpur, Faridkot,Bathinda and Patiala showing growth of 16.90%, 12.14%, 3.49%, 7.93%, 10.28%, 21.77%, 6.59% and 6.65% respectively. Whereas the number of primary schools showed negative growth in districts like Gurdaspur (-7.43%), Amritsar (-34.15%), Rupnagar (-29.28%) and Sangrur (-17.25%).The number of teachers in primary schools increased during post-reform period depicting the highest growth in Kapurthala (103.05%), followed by Jalandhar (101.01%), Hoshiarpur (85.04%) and Ferozpur (26.53%) while districts like Gurdaspur (-35.35%), Amritsar (-42.35%), Rupnagar (-35.49%), Sangrur (-26.96%), Bathinda (-14.33%) and Patiala (-10.04%).It is observed from the table that during post-reform period the status of number of primary schools and number of teachers in primary schools has improved as compared to pre-reform period.

Table 1.3 Number of Primary Schools and Teachers in Primary schools

Pre-reform period

Post-Reform Period

Number of primary schools

Number of teachers in primary schools

Number of primary schools

Number of teachers in primary schools

District

1981

1991

Growth Rate

1981

1991

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

Gurdaspur

1327

1308

-1.43

4967

4925

-0.84

1736

1607

-7.43

6530

4221

-35.35

Amritsar

1488

1440

-3.22

7188

6527

-9.19

1461

962

-34.15

5806

3347

-42.35

Kapurthala

486

485

-0.20

1827

1677

-8.21

485

567

16.90

1442

2928

103.05

Jalandhar

1177

1175

-0.16

5219

4708

-9.79

914

1025

12.14

2957

5944

101.01

Hoshiarpur

1435

1426

-0.62

4788

4498

-6.05

1259

1303

3.49

3504

6484

85.04

Rupnagar

866

849

-1.96

2550

2484

-2.58

823

582

-29.28

2096

1352

-35.49

Ludhiana

1008

1024

-1.58

5250

4711

-10.26

1046

1129

7.93

3976

4044

1.71

Ferozpur

1131

1135

0.35

3679

3407

-7.39

1060

1169

10.28

2468

3123

26.53

Faridkot

739

767

3.78

4068

4203

3.31

225

274

21.77

1016

1121

10.33

bathinda

624

670

7.37

3110

3086

-0.77

470

439

6.59

2100

1799

-14.33

Sangrur

832

829

-0.36

3552

3322

-6.47

817

676

-17.25

2796

2042

-26.96

Patiala

1270

1271

0.078

4618

4426

-4.16

947

1010

6.65

2838

2553

-10.04

Mean

1031.91

1031.58

4234.66

3997.83

936.92

895.25

3127.41

3246.5

SD

325.21

310.61

1427.45

1281.33

426.51

391.37

1642.88

1695.02

CV(%)

31.51

30.11

33.70

32.05

45.52

43.71

52.53

52.21

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues.

The districts like Gurdaspur , Amritsar , Rupnagar and Sangrur showed negative growth in both, number of primary schools and number of teachers in primary schools showing -7.43%, -34.15%, -29.28% &-17.25% respectively and -35.35% , -42.35% , -35.49% and -26.96% respectively. The mean value of number of primary schools during post-reform period is 936.92 and 895.25 with a variation of 45.52% and 43.71% respectively and the mean value of number of teachers in primary schools is 936.92 in 2001 and 895.25 in 2011 with a variation of 45.52% and 43.71%.

Health: Health is an essential element of well being. Good health is considered as both the means and the end of development.

2(a) Number of medical institutions and beds in medical institutions : the number of medical institutions increased in all the districts during pre-reform period depicting the highest growth in Rupnagar (23.97%) followed by Gurdaspur (23.27%), Sangrur (21.33%) Ludhiana (19.25%). The number of beds in medical institutions is also increased during this period depicting the highest growth in Faridkot (45.77%) followed by Rupnagar (24.68%), Hoshiarpur (22.63%) and Kapurthala (21.92%). It is observed that during pre-reform period the number of beds in medical institutions increased with the increase in number of medical institutions. The mean value of medical institutions in 1981 is 155 and 182.91 in 1991 revealing variation of 27.21% and 26.88% respectively. Whereas the mean value of number of beds in medical institutions in 1981 is 1703.41 and 2003.92 in 1991 registering a variation of 55.89% and 53.17%.

Table 1.4 Number of medical institutions and beds in medical institutions

Pre-reform period

Post-Reform Period

Number of medical institutions

Number of beds in medical institutions

Number of medical institutions

Number of beds in medical institutions

District

1981

1991

Growth Rate(%)

1981

1991

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate (%)

Gurdaspur

159

196

23.27

1308

1548

18.34

196

178

-9.18

1575

1502

-4.63

Amritsar

228

266

16.66

3884

4429

14.03

269

145

-46.09

4623

3096

-33.03

Kapurthala

76

82

7.89

593

723

21.92

83

70

-15.66

773

667

-13.71

Jalandhar

193

228

18.13

2092

2477

18.40

170

152

-10.58

2189

1315

-39.92

Hoshiarpur

147

185

25.85

1246

1528

22.63

167

138

-17.36

1491

1211

-18.77

Rupnagar

92

114

23.91

725

904

24.68

118

52

-55.93

978

525

-46.31

Ludhiana

194

224

15.46

2838

3343

17.79

217

167

-23.04

3427

1426

-58.38

Ferozpur

135

161

19.25

1412

1590

12.60

149

131

-12.08

1634

1151

-29.55

Faridkot

158

181

14.55

1372

2000

45.77

41

34

-17.07

790

780

-1.26

bathinda

150

175

16.66

1274

1397

9.65

117

103

-11.96

990

994

0.40

Sangrur

150

182

21.33

1215

1438

18.35

185

115

-37.83

1570

1041

-33.69

Patiala

178

201

12.92

2482

2670

7.57

163

116

-28.83

2464

2061

-16.35

Mean

155

182.91

1703.41

2003.92

156.25

116.75

1875.33

1314.08

SD

42.18

49.18

952.17

1065.43

60.95

45.11

1158.91

695.55

CV (%)

27.21

26.88

55.89

53.17

39.00

38.64

61.79

52.93

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues.

During post-reform period number of medical institutions decreased in all districts showing negative growth in Amritsar (-46.09%), Sangrur (-37.83%), Patiala (-28.83) and so on. Beds in medical institutions have also decreased during the same period except Bathinda showing 0.40% growth..While all other districts showed negative growth like Ludhiana (-58.38%), Rupnagar (-46.31%), Amritsar (-33.03%), Sangrur (-33.69%) and so on. Thus it is observed that the number of medical institutions and number of beds in medical institutions decreased in post-reform period. The mean value of number of medical institutions in 2001 is 156.25 and 116.75 in 2011 revealing variation of 39% and 38.64% respectively. Whereas the mean value of the number of beds in medical institutions in 2001 is 1875.33 and 1314.08 in 2011 with a variation of 61.79% and 52.93% respectively.

2 (a) Number of hospitals, PHCs and dispensaries: table 1.5 shows the number of hospitals , dispensaries and PHCs during Pre-reform and Post-Reform Period. During this pre-reform period the number of hospitals decreased in all the districts, revealing negative growth rate in Bathinda (-28.57%), Gurdaspur (-23.80%), Hoshiarpur & Rupnagar (-20%), Faridkot (-19.04%), Sangrur (-18.18%). However the number of dispensaries showed positive growth in the districts of Gurdaspur (1.6%), Amritsar (1.13%), Jalandhar (4.54%), Hoshiarpur (6.08%) and Rupnagar (4%), on the other hand Kapurthala (-4.76%), Ferozpur (-5.66%), Faridkot (-6.34%), Bathinda(-3.33%) and Patiala (-8.9%) whereas Ludhiana and Sangrur does not show any growth the number being 156 and 117 for both respectively. The PHCs show tremendous growth rate depicting the highest growth rate in Ferozpur and Bathinda (322.22%) followed by Patiala (300%), Sangrur (272.72%) and Faridkot (263.63%). During the pre-reform period the mean of hospitals is 21.08 in 1981 and 18.16 in 1991with a variation of 34..70% and 40.51% respectively. However, during the same period the mean value of dispensaries is 123.16 in 1981 and 122.08 in 1991 registering a variation of 26.43% and 27.36%, whereas the mean value of PHCs is 10.75 in 1981 and 36.83 in 1991 exposing a variation of 26.64% and 29.12%. During the post reform period, the number of hospitals again decreased, showing a negative growth rate like Gurdaspur (-76.92%), Amritsar (-78.78%), Jalandhar (86.36%), Sangrur (-76.47%) and so on. Similarly the number of dispensaries also decreased, showing negative growth in Gurdaspur (-44%), Kapurthala (-15.25%), Rupnagar (-58.53%), Sangrur (-37.60%) and so on.The number of PHCs also decreased during this period showing negative growth in Gurdaspur (-13.04%), Amritsar (-25%), Hoshiarpur (-11.11%), Rupnagar (-43.47%), Sangrur (-21.95%) and so on. Only Kapurthala (18.18%) and Jalandhar (3.70%) showed positive growth. The mean value during post reform period , of hospitals is 15.33 and 4, of dispensaries is 102.16 and 78.75 and of PHCs is 30.58 & 26.41 respectively registering a variation of 53.80 % & 35.35%, 39.10% & 40.93% and 40.65% & 39.28 % respectively. It is observed from the table that inter district disparity has increased in post-reform period. Moreover , the number of various types of medical institutions has decreased in post-reform period as compared to pre-reform period.


Table 1.5 Number of Different Types of Medical Institutions

Pre-reform period

Post-Reform Period

Number of hospitals

Number of dispensaries

Number of PHCs

Number of hospitals

Number of dispensaries

Number of PHCs

District

19811111111981

1991

Growth Rate

1981

1991

Growth rate

1981

1991

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

2001

2011

Growth rate

Gurdaspur

21

16

-23.80

125

127

1.6

13

47

261.58

13

3

-76.92

127

120

-5.51

46

40

-13.04

Amritsar

35

33

-5.71

176

178

1.13

17

49

188.23

33

7

-78.78

175

98

-44

48

36

-25

Kapurthala

7

7

-

63

60

-4.76

6

10

66.66

8

3

-62.5

59

50

-15.25

11

13

18.18

Jalandhar

27

25

7.40

154

161

4.54

12

36

200

22

3

-86.36

114

110

-3.50

27

28

3.70

Hoshiarpur

20

16

20

115

122

6.08

12

41

241.67

13

4

-69.23

110

93

-15.45

36

32

-11.11

Rupnagar

10

8

20

75

78

4

7

23

228.57

8

2

-75

82

34

-58.53

23

13

-43.47

Ludhiana

27

27

-

156

156

-

11

35

218.18

27

5

-81.48

147

120

-18.36

33

33

-

Ferozpur

20

17

15

106

100

-5.66

9

38

322.22

16

4

-75

87

85

-2.29

35

34

-2.85

Faridkot

21

17

19.04

126

118

-6.34

11

40

263.63

6

3

-50

24

20

-16.66

9

8

-11.11

bathinda

21

15

-28.57

120

116

-3.33

9

38

322.22

10

4

-60

78

70

-10.25

23

20

-15

Sangrur

22

18

-18.18

117

117

-

11

41

272.72

17

4

-76.47

117

73

-37.60

41

32

-21.95

Patiala

22

19

-13.63

145

132

-8.9

11

44

300

11

6

-45.45

106

72

-32.07

35

28

-20

Mean

21.08

18.16

123.16

122.08

10.75

36.83

15.33

4

102.16

78.75

30.58

26.41

SD

7.31

7.35

32.55

33.41

2.86

10.72

8.24

1.41

39.95

32.23

12.43

10.37

CV (%)

34.70

40.51

26.43

27.36

26.64

29.12

53.80

35.35

39.10

40.93

40.65

39.28

Source: Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues.


Conclusion and Policy Implications

Social infrastructure, especially education and health play a crucial in the development of nations whether developed and developing. These provide the basic foundation on which the superstructure of development and growth can be erected. If the foundation of social infrastructure is strong, development is not only easily attainable but it also becomes continuous, stable, quantitative and qualitative .Social infrastructures are not the facilities which lead to improve the quality of human life, but represents the very essence of all rounded progress. The study found that in case of number of high schools Gurdasur stood at first rank in both time periods showing 25% and 65.57% growth respectively. However, districts like Ferozpur, Kapurthala, Hoshiarpur, Ludhiana, Faridkot and Bathinda also showed positive growth in number of high schools and number of teachers in high in high schools. On the other hand, districts like Amritsar , Rupnagar, Sangrur and Jalandhar showed negative growth in number of high schools during post-reform period. In number of middle schools also , Gurdaspur showed highest growth of 90.03% during post-reform period, however during pre-reform period Gurdaspur didn’t show any growth. The districts like Hoshiarpur, Rupnagar, Ludhiana, Faridkot and Patiala show improvement in number of middle schools during post-reform period in comparison to re-reform period. The number of teachers in middle schools also show better position in post-reform period as compared to pre-reform period, except Amritsar Rupnagar and Sangrur. The status of number of primary schools and number of teachers have also improved in post reform period except Gurdaspur, Amritsar, Rupnagar and Sangrur. However, Patiala and Bathinda showed negative growth of number of teachers in primary schools but positive growth of number of primary schools during post-reform period. The study also found that during post reform period all districts showed negative growth in number of medical institutions and number of beds in medical institutions also showed negative growth except in Bathinda. In case of various types of medical institutions it is observed that the all the types viz. Hospitals,Dispensaries and PHCs showed negative growth during post reform period, which ultimately means that number of hospitals , dispensaries and PHCs have decreased during post reform period in comparison to pre-reform period. From the study it is analysed that disparities among the districts have increased during the post reform period. Now at the end, as it is said that educated and healthy people build a nation with a healthy growth; social infrastructure plays a vital role in improving the social well-being, standard of living, level of education and health services. Yet Social infrastructure has not received the much required attention. The study concluded that to inter district disparities can be eradicated by investing in both public and private sectors. More investment in the social sectors like education, health services and other development activities is the need of the hour.


References

· Anant, T.C.A., K.L.Krishna, Uma Roy Choudhary (1994), Measuring Inter-State Differentials in Infrastructure, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics, Delhi.

· Bawa R.S and Mehra A. (1991), “Sources of Regional Disparities in Rural Infrastructure in Punjab”, PSE, Economic Analyst, Vol. XII, No. 2.

· Bhaskar, R.R and Bhargava P.(2003), “Disparities in Infrastructure Development in Rajasthan”, Indian Journal of Regional Science, Vol. XXXV, No.1, pp 57-66.

· Bawa R.S and Mehra A. (1991), “Sources of Regional Disparities in Rural Infrastructure in Punjab”, PSE, Economic Analyst, Vol. XII, No. 2.

· Dadibhavi, R.V (1991), “Disparities in Social Infrastructure Development in India: 1970-71 to 1984-85”, The Asian Economic Review, Vol. XXXIII, No.1, pp.31-48.

· Joshi, Seema (2006) “Impact of Economic Reforms on Social Sector Expenditure in India”, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.41, No.4, pp.358-365.

· Kumar Avneesh and Gupta Saurav (2012), “Health Infrastructure in India: Critical Analysis of Policy Gaps in the Indian Healthcare Delivery”,Occasional paper downloaded from http:// www.vifindia.org on 10th August’2015.

· Purohit B.C and Tasleem A. Siddiqui (1994) “Utilisation of Health Services in India”, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.29, No.18, pp. 1071-1080.

· Sahoo Pravakar,Dash Ranjan Kumar and Nataraj Geetanjali 2012, “China’s Growth Story: The Role of Physical and Social Infrastructure” Journal of Economic development, Vol 37, no.1 march , pp 53-75.

· Statistical Abstract of Punjab, Various Issues.

 
 

Pacific Institute of Management, Pacific Hills, Airport Road, Udaipur - 313001, E-mail: edit@pbr.co.in
Phone : +91-294-2494506, +91-294-2494507

©Pbr.co.in, All Right Reserved IT Department , Pacific Group