Richer States could lose political clout in population-based delimitation

India’s original constitutional scheme envisaged redrawing the map of Lok Sabha seats after every Census
| Photo Credit: Vishal Mathew 10099@Mumbai

A nation state, like a family, is designed on the premise that its resources and responsibilities are collectively shared by its members in an equitable manner agreed upon by the community. The stronger individuals and groups are expected to support the weaker ones; a progressive taxation policy is one manifestation of that approach.

When there is significant disparity across regions and social groups, this arrangement comes under strain and needs innovation. India is facing a governance challenge resulting from the regional divergence in wealth and population.

That is the trigger for the ongoing debate between States and social groups on delimitation (linked to political representation) and tax devolution (linked to the creation and sharing of wealth and resources).

India’s original constitutional scheme envisaged redrawing the map of Lok Sabha seats after every Census, accounting for variations in population. When it was noticed that populations in some regions were not stabilising as rapidly as others, this decadal delimitation was frozen in 1976. It was postponed for 25 years, until 2001, and then again for another 25 years until 2026, through constitutional amendments.

The assumption in postponing delimitation was that by then the development trajectories of a majority of the regions would converge. This did not happen from 1976 to 2001, or even after 2001. In 2026, India would have completed 50 years without inter-State reapportionment of constituencies. With the 2021 Census not conducted, we don’t know what the regional demographic trends are.

Population size, composition, and quality are linked to wealth creation and sharing. The graphs show the divergence between various regions in terms of population size and economic performance. Composition and quality are not analysed. To measure economic performance, we use the relative per capita income level — the ratio of a State’s per capita Net State Domestic Product to the all-India per capita Net National Product, expressed as a percentage.

Charts 1, 2 and 3 plot States’ relative per capita income levels in 1961, 2001 and 2024, respectively. The vertical axis shows relative income levels, while the horizontal axis shows each State’s share in India’s population. In 1961, the relative income levels of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Karnataka were comparable to those of U.P., Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh.

Chart 1 plots States’ relative per capita income levels in 1961

By 2001, the relative income levels in Maharashtra, Gujarat, West Bengal, and all the southern States had risen to match those of Punjab and Haryana — States that had a head start due to the Green Revolution. In contrast, the levels of U.P., Bihar, and M.P. declined. The newly formed States carved out of them too had low income levels, along with Odisha and Rajasthan.

Chart 2 plots States’ relative per capita income levels in 2001

By 2024, the income gap between the economically advanced and lagging States had widened further. Chart 3 plots States’ relative per capita income levels in 2024

A few exceptions stood out: the relative income levels of West Bengal and Punjab dipped, while that of Uttarakhand improved. Notably, during this period, the population share of the economically lagging Hindi heartland States grew, while the share of many advanced States — especially in western and peninsular India — was stable or declined.

If delimitation were to happen according to the current population, States with a better economic performance could face a slide in their political power to States with a lower economic performance. To frame this discussion as a north-south divide is inaccurate. This debate is about regional disparities. Addressing them must be a national priority.

Source: Relative per capita income is sourced from the reports by the Economic Advisory Council to the PM. Population data is from census. Electorate data is from Election Commission

[email protected]

[email protected]