Author: Prashanthi Subbiah

India’s Rich Have Got Richer During the Pandemic: Oxfam

Oxfam has found that taxing India’s wealthiest, even in small proportions, is enough to fund major government schemes that could be instrumental in uplifting those from the lower economic strata.

New Delhi: Oxfam has released a report on economic inequality in India, which is found to have only deepened during the COVID-19 pandemic. This can be attributed to caste and class disparities, such as the physical remoteness of certain Scheduled Tribes (STs) from resources that foster upward social and economic mobility, or the inheritance of wealth and caste privilege. 

A major indicator of economic inequality is income disparities. Oxfam has found that not only has the bulk of wealth is concentrated in the net worth of a small chunk of the population, but this has increased largely due to the pandemic. Particularly, the outbreak of COVID-19 has led to the diminishing of wealth for the bottom 50% of the Indian population. In 2020, their income share was only 13% of national income, and just 3% of national wealth. In other words, the pandemic has led to much contraction of the income and wealth of the bottom 50% of India. 

Meanwhile, the top 30% owns over 90% of India’s wealth. Additionally, the top 10% own over 72% of wealth, and the richest 5%, nearly 62%. These figures top those of the pre-pandemic years (2018-19), which shows that the richest have only gotten richer during the pandemic. 

A similar trend can be seen in absolute numbers; the number of poor people in India is 228.9 million, while the number of billionaires has increased from 102 (2020) to 166 (2022). Thus, the report has found that income inequality has only increased, and much of this could be attributed to the pandemic. 

Another factor related to  economic inequality in India is the hiking of the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Before the virus hit, the government had reduced corporate tax slabs from 30% to 22%, which resulted in a loss of 1.84 lakh crores in revenue. To compensate for this loss, excise duties and GST on the prices of petroleum and diesel were substantially increased. This was done in tandem with slashing down exemptions. 

What this led to was an unequal impact on rural and urban areas of India, most tangible in inflation. It was found that inflation was 7.56% higher in rural India than in urban regions in September 2022. The absolute numbers of both dropped in October 2022, but the gap still showed an increase of 2.5 times within a month’s time. This is especially felt in the increase in food prices in rural and urban areas, with the hike in food prices nearly twice in the former cities. Once again, this case in the report goes to show that during the pandemic, economic fissures have further widened. 

A major recommendation Oxfam puts forward to reduce economic inequality is taxing the rich. The report dedicates an entire section to putting forward reasons for this, which can be summarised as so:

1. 1% wealth tax on Indian billionaires is enough to fund the National Health Mission, India’s largest healthcare scheme. It would be able to provide Rs 36,960 crores for three years.

2. Taxing the top 10 billionaires at 5% would cover healthcare costs for tribal areas for five years.

3. Taxing India’s billionaires at 2% would support the nutrition of India’s malnourished for three years, through the Supplemental Nutrition Programme (SNP).

4. The finds from taxing India’s billionaires at 2% could be used to increase expenditure on health.

5. Taxing the wealthiest 10 billionaires at 1% would cover this shortfall between the amount requested for the Samagra Shiksha (centrally-supported scheme for school education) and what the ministry of education granted them, for three years. Taxing 4% would cover the entire amount of funds requested for two years. 

6. Taking India’s top 100 billionaires at 2.5%, or the top 10 at 5% would yield an amount enough to bring out-of-school children back to receive quality education (Rs 1.4 lakh crore).

7. 2% taxes levied on the top 100 billionaires would fund the mid-day meals scheme that was proposed by the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP 2020).

8. The amount needed to fill vacancies in elementary schools (Rs 2040.3 crore) can be raised by taxing the 10 richest Indian billionaires at 1% (funding for 13 years), or by taxing the 100 richest Indian billionaires at 1% (funding for 26 years).

Overall, Oxfam has found that taxing India’s wealthiest, even in small proportions, is enough to fund major government schemes that could be instrumental in uplifting those from the lower economic strata. This would be a step in reducing economic inequality. 

The report concludes with a list of recommendations. Taxing the wealthy (specifically the top 1%) is the first of these, mostly owing to the reasons elaborated on above. The impact of taxing the rich could perhaps help in breaking the connection between government policy and the interests of India’s wealth, which tends to make the latter even richer. Additionally, easing the tax burden on the poor and marginalised could aid in reducing economic inequality, along with improving access to public services (health and education). The latter could foster socioeconomic upliftment. The final recommendation Oxfam gives is to strengthen the safety and bargaining power of India’s labour force. This would entail ensuring social protection (as 90% of labour is part of the informal economy) through monitoring and tracking mechanisms. 

ILO Report Shows East and South Asia Clock in the Longest Working Weeks

China and India have seen a steady increase in annual working hours per worker during 1970-2017, from around 2,000 hours per year to slightly over 2,000, with China clocking in more hours and India being relatively consistent.

New Delhi: The International Labour Organisation (ILO) released a new report on working time and work-life balance across the globe, in which it was clearly found that South and East Asia clock in the highest working hours. Much of this data was taken from the years just before the COVID-19 pandemic hit the world.

The average annual hours per worker in South Korea, China, and India is still much higher than the US, Brazil and France, the report titled Working Time and Work-Life Balance Around the World said.

For example, China and India have seen a steady increase in annual working hours per worker during 1970-2017, from around 2,000 hours per year to slightly over 2,000, with China clocking in more hours and India being relatively consistent.

South Korea, on the other hand, has seen an overall decrease. From 1950 until the 1980s, a steep increase was seen from well under 2,500 hours per year to well above 2,500. It quickly dipped to just over 2,000 hours (less than India and China).

Longitudinal trends in average annual hours of work, selected developing countries versus two key developed countries. Photo: ILO’s Working Time and Work-Life Balance Around the World report

The US has seen a substantial decrease from around 2,000 hours in a year in 1950 to between 1,700-1,800 hours, annually, in 2017. From 1950 to 1970, Brazil saw an increase from 2,000 hours to slightly above, after which it decreased and is slightly less than the US. Germany has had a steady decrease from just above 2,500 hours in 1950 to under 1,500 hours in 2017.

In the last 50 years or so, it can be said that this study shows that South and East Asia work more hours in a year than the Western countries, for selected nations.

Also read: Indians Work Longest, Earn Least With Virtually No Time for Leisure: ILO Report

The ILO study found that South and East Asia have the highest average number of working hours in a week. South Asia records an average number of 49 working hours in a week, per worker, and East Asia, 48.8 hours.

It is also important to note the gendered difference. In South Asia, the number of working hours per week is 51.5 for men and 40.8 for women. East Asia records 49.4 for men and 48.1 for women. The gap between the average working hours for each gender is more uniform in the case of East Asia, suggesting that there is a lower gender disparity in working hours than in South Asia.

The least number of average working hours in a week are in Northern America and Northern, Western, and Southern Europe. Northern America records an overall average of 37.9 working hours in a week, with 40.1 for men and 35.4 for women. Northern, Western, and Southern Europe record 37.2 hours overall, with the average for men being 40.1 hours and women, 33.8.

Average number of hours of work per week, workers in formal and informal employment (in %, 2019) Photo: ILO’s Working Time and Work-Life Balance Around the World report

In addition to this, the broader Asia-Pacific region records the highest percentage of workers in developing, emerging, and developed regions working more than 48 hours a week (46.7%), especially in South (57.1%) and East Asia (47.7%). Similar trends have been recorded by self-employed workers in the region as well.

Another highlight is the formal and informal sector trends seen in South and East Asia. South Asia records 53.4 working hours in a week per worker in the formal sector (highest in the formal sector), 48.5 in informal. Meanwhile, East Asia records 47.8 working hours in a week per worker in the formal sector, and 51.2 hours in the informal sector (highest in the informal sector).

However, all of these are pre-COVID-19 figures. In order to ascertain the current situation, perhaps another study needs to be conducted sometime in the near future to assess the impact of the pandemic, which will give a current picture of East and South Asia’s standings in global working hours.

Digital Transformation Can’t Solve Structural Inequalities, Says New Oxfam Report

In this year’s edition of the India Inequality Report, the NGO says that governments should universalise internet connectivity and “treat digital technologies as a public utility, not a privilege” to bridge the digital divide.

New Delhi: With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, India dramatically shifted operations into the digital space. Many day-to-day tasks became reliant on stable internet connections. Though there was a paradigm shift in the way people access essential services, socioeconomic divisions that existed in the physical world have been replicated in the digital world says a new report published by the non-profit organisation Oxfam India.

The NGO releases an annual India Inequality Report and has focused on the Digital Divide in this year’s edition. A digital divide refers to the disproportionate ability some sections of society have in accessing digital information and communication technologies.

“Technology and digitalisation have benefitted the privileged but have also been the cause of inequalities creating a digital divide. This divide largely stems from unequal access to and use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs),” the report says.

Amitabh Behar, CEO of Oxfam India, said that India’s growing inequality is “accentuated” due to the digital divide. “The growing inequality based on caste, religion, gender, class, and geographic location also gets replicated in the digital space. People without devices and the internet get further marginalised due to difficulties in accessing education, health, and public services,” Behar said, according to Businessline. He said governments should universalise internet connectivity and “treat digital technologies as a public utility, not a privilege”.

The report has measured indicators such as possession of devices (mobile phones, computers, televisions, etc.), access to electricity, and digital literacy to assess to what extent social inequalities have been translated onto the internet.

The report points out that though the country experienced a sudden move to digital mediums for essential services such as education, health and financial transactions due to the digital revolution, and then further due to the pandemic, 96.6% of the respondents in a CMIE survey conducted between September and December 2021 said that they did not own a computer or laptop.

“While mobile phones with internet connection can also serve the purpose of attending online classes, etc., and would be convenient for apps, having a laptop or computer would be more convenient for carrying out assignments,” the report says.

The digital divide on the basis of caste is also quite palpable. Oxfam has found that a person from the general category is 8% more likely than someone belonging to the Scheduled Tribes (ST) community to possess a computer as of 2021. This number has risen from 7% in 2018.

Similarly, general and other backward classes (OBC) are 4-6% more likely to have televisions than those belonging to the ST and Scheduled Castes (SC) community.

On the contrary, the gap between the general category and STs in owning mobile phones has dropped from 10% to 3% between 2018 and 2021.

The schism between the upper and lower castes of the Indian population has expanded since the beginning of the pandemic when it comes to owning large devices. However, it has narrowed with respect to smaller devices, which are less expensive than the former.

It is imperative that we also consider the gap in the quality of access to the digital world to assess the digital divide, as whatever is being compensated for is occurring through devices with a more limited capacity than computers and televisions.

Also Read: Retooling India’s Digital Infrastructure to Truly Help the Poorest

Gender and class divide

Gender inequalities have been reflected on the internet as well. The report states that only a third of India’s Internet users are women. Women are also 30% less likely than men to own a mobile phone and are also less likely to use it for internet services. This can pose a threat to women’s education rates.

Oxfam reported that during the pandemic, “Internet drop-outs [from educational institutions] come disproportionately from groups with lower probabilities of going online in the first place.” With women less likely to have access to the Internet, the chances of women’s education rates dropping have increased. Gendered division in society has been mirrored onto the internet, which could further widen it both online and offline.

Another important facet is class, encapsulated by the report in affordability, employment, and educational level. India ranks 47th in Internet affordability out of 110 countries, according to a global index on digital quality of life. Thus, Internet access is relatively affordable in the country.

However, the perks of cheap internet are enjoyed disproportionately. Studies show that “each gigabyte (GB) of data costs low-income households (earning less than $2 per day) 3% of their monthly income versus 0.2% for middle-income households (earning $10–$20 per day)”.

The highest proportion of people with computers, mobile phones, and electricity are salaried employees, while the least are daily-wage workers. When it comes to educational levels, the higher the level, the more likely the person is to spend money on devices and internet charges.

If we are to consider higher affordability, permanent employment, and high educational qualifications as indicators of belonging to an upper socio-economic class, then the higher the class one belongs to, the better the chances they have of accessing the internet and the digital world. Thus, there is a wide digital divide between the lower and upper socio-economic classes.

Even if one is able to afford digital devices, a major inhibitor in accessing the digital world is digital literacy. It has been found that the gap in digital literacy has been quantified as 35% between rural and urban households. The latter is more digitally literate.

Members of ST communities have the lowest level of digital literacy, at 21%, and anecdotal evidence shows that women, especially entrepreneurs, are less digitally literate than men. Even if access to digital devices is widespread, the ability to actually utilise them is largely dictated by social divisions and inequalities in India, the report says.

Inside a classroom at the Government Boys Senior Secondary School, Rouse Avenue, ITO. Credit: Tanya.

Social factors determine access

Overall, India’s digital divide has occurred on the basis of multiple social factors. Data indicates that people identifying as male, ‘upper caste’ and class, and living in urban areas are more likely to have a long-term internet connection than other underprivileged groups.

“In a country plagued by high socioeconomic inequality, the process of digitalisation in itself can not be posited as the panacea for the inherent challenges of the physical world. It becomes particularly problematic when half of the population neither has access to gadgets and the Internet or the technological know-how to move to a digital environment,” Oxfam says.

Warning that the process of digitalisation may not just ensure that inequalities endure but may even exacerbate them, the report says that digital technology brings with itself a lot of hurdles and challenges “which need to be addressed for an inclusive, resilient and a sustainable digital environment”.

Oxfam says that because the report highlights economic inequality as a key driver of the digital divide, governments should make efforts to bridge this inequality by improving the income of the poor. This can be done by increasing the minimum wage easing the indirect tax burden on citizens and provision of universal health and education services.

To improve availability of the Internet, Oxfam suggests that service providers establish community networks and public WiFi or internet access points. Additionally, the report recommends investment in the digital industry to drive down consumer prices and initiatives to improve digital literacy among underprivileged sections.

It concludes:

“Acknowledge that tech-based solutions are not always the right answers. People need to have multiple ways to access public services and their entitlements. Digital means should not be the only way to access these. Even in times of crises like pandemics, governments also need to consider low- or no-tech solutions.”

Landfill Fires Just The Tip of the Iceberg; There’s More About Dumpyards to Discuss

Landfill fires are one of the more visible consequences of poor waste management; there are many others, with consequences for society, ecology and environmental justice. 

Landfill fires are becoming a big challenge for India’s urban civic bodies. In late April 2022, fires broke out in landfills in Chennai, Delhi and Chandigarh. Since 2015, the number of landfill fires in metropolitan cities has surged across India. Waste accumulation in Delhi and Bangalore has risen dramatically, by 1,850% and 2,175%, respectively, between 1999 and 2016. This is notable because more waste in a landfill entails a bigger fire, and probably a bigger chance of catching fire in the first place depending on the composition of the trash. Landfill fires are also becoming more common in cities where waste generation is accelerating, like Chennai.

Landfill fires are one of the more visible consequences of poor waste management; there are many others, with consequences for society, ecology and environmental justice. 

Consider the Mandur landfill near Bengaluru, which caught media attention in 2014 when people protested demanding a ban on waste dumping. I was 12 years old at the time and lived in an environmentally conscious community in the city. In solidarity with the people affected by the waste at the landfill, we began segregating our waste at source and reduced the use of single-use plastics. The city municipal corporation also launched awareness campaigns for all residents to adopt similar measures, and soon after made it policy. The authorities stopped dumping waste at the Mandur landfill in December 2014, while the city banned single-use plastics and mandated waste segregation at the source in Bengaluru in 2017.

As a result, the Mandur problem didn’t get any worse – but there is more.

The waste pile-up at the landfill had degraded the health, finances and social lives of the residents of Mandur village. The landfill here is close to water bodies that were reservoirs for the people, and leachate from the dump had contaminated them. In 2020, the water was highly basic, had a high concentration of dissolved ions and of total dissolved solids. The site has also become a breeding ground for flies that then sit on  food and spread disease. Many of the people in Mandur had no option but to eat such food and drink such water, leading to frequent disease outbreaks. Fumes from the dump also pollute the air, causing respiratory ailments

When the people get sick, they can’t work. When their income drops, they have less – if anything – to spend on clinic visits and bottled water. Farming has been one of the least affected livelihoods in Mandur, but local farmers have reported a dip in harvest coinciding with the landfill’s use. 

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, parents and their children in Mandur were wary of sending the latter to school, for fear of exposing them to some ailment or other. This obviously bodes more social and financial challenges in future. 

In effect, the dumping of waste in Mandur has led to damages that the people will experience for several years to come. 

I moved to Ahmedabad in 2016, where I noted many similarities to people’s habits in Bengaluru before 2014. This city has sent a lot of its municipal and industrial waste to the Pirana landfill for 35 years. In 2002, political parties and civic groups resettled people displaced by the riots to areas around Pirana. One of them is Citizen Nagar. Today, its residents suffer through poor health thanks to their proximity to the landfill, have little access to basic essentials, including potable water, and have low incomes.

But for all these similarities, there are two ways in which Mandur and Pirana differ. First, the land rights of the people of Citizen Nagar are uncertain. None of the people here own any part of the land; it belongs to the relief committee of the Kerala Muslim League. Even their status as ‘permanent residents’ is unclear. Second, the site of the settlement is a wetland. Between 2003 and 2020, the population rose from 40 families to 120, which in turn increased the pressure on local ecosystems.

Such long-term fallouts from landfills, like an octopus sprouting new and longer tentacles, have a national consequence as well: they could compromise India’s ability to achieve some of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Achieving the SDGs is an important component of inter- and intra-generational equity. The stories of the people of Mandur and Pirana in particular ask important questions about India’s progress towards SDGs 11 and 15. SDG 11 is to “make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”; SDG 15 is to “protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss”. It’s important that we act quickly and effectively, with minimal negative impact, so that fallouts like those in Mandur do not become frequent occurrences we see in the headlines on a regular basis.

The author thanks Dr. John Matthew and Dr. Kalpita Bhar Paul for their feedback and comments.