In an Indian Express op-ed, Bibek Debroy makes an important point:
[Whenever] we think of higher education, we tend to think of it as a public good that must be provided by the state, because there are market failures. Economists have a technical definition of a public good. By no stretch of the imagination is higher education a public good. Nor is this sector one where there is market failure, with private sector entry and provisioning impossible. The problem lies in licensing restrictions that constrain private sector entry through HRD ministry, UGC, AICTE, Medical Council, Bar Council and so on, barring a few areas. Given asymmetry of information, one does need regulation, but licensing is not the same as regulation. If one is interested in broadening access, improving quality and providing services linked to what the market wants, the appropriate policy response is to trigger supply-side responses, instead of presuming the public sector has to deliver higher education. Expenditure on education may very well need to be 6 per cent of GDP, and that on higher education 3 per cent, but who has said this has to be public expenditure? Even if higher education is a merit good that warrants subsidies for the poor, the private sector, in India and elsewhere, does offer cross-subsidies. And there are better ways of routing public subsidies also. In this entire quota debate, we are not attempting to solve the root of the problem.
Much the same point was made by Satya when he said, "It's the supply, stupid!"
6 Comments:
Clearly they are attempting to fix the wrong problem and in a manner grossly unfair to a section of the society using a method that is highly ineffective.
Look like the LPG issue
Some ten years ago, tehre was a QUOTA for LPG connection (MP Quota etc)
Now, since the supply is good, the quota has vanished
When will the educational quota vanish? When everyone has an MBBS or a B.Tech. certificate?
Why don't they remove all quotas as well as all Shankaracharya(Dr Ambedkar's son said that since Shankaracharyas cannot come from Dalit group, there must be OBC reservation in IIT, IIM).If they really want a casteless system, instead of going for reservation in higher education, they should hit the exact problem by removing the caste thing from Shankaracharya position. They should ban the matrimonial columns where caste is the bar for marriage. Reservation cannot be solution of any problem existing in our society, hit the problem directly instead of taking revenge from a few caste in name of reservation.
//Reservation cannot be solution of any problem existing in our society, hit the problem directly instead of taking revenge from a few caste in name of reservation.//
Well,
There are a lot of factors which have a say in the "mark" and "rank" in exams
1. A city guy scores more than village guy even though they are of same intelligence and same caste
2. A girl scores more than a boy even though they are of same intelligence and same caste (No arguments on this point alone... Please.. .Let us discuss) though a boy is more likely to be sent to college than a girl
3. A rich guy scores more than a poor guy even though they are of same intelligence even though they are from the same caste
4. A guy whose parents are graduates scores more than a guy whose parents are not graduates even though they are of same intelligence even though they are from the same caste
5. A guy whose parents know to read and write scores more than a guy whose parents are illiterates even though they are of same intelligence even though they are from the same caste
6. A guy studying in Private School scores more than a guy in Govt School even though they are from the same caste(don't compare those posh insitutes - I am talking about the average Indian School where teachers have to do works like taking census, election duty and veryfying beneficiaries for Ration Rice) even though they are of same intelligence
What I wanted to tell was that there are a LOT OF FACTORS that influence the marks of candidates OTHER THAN INTELLIGENCE.
For many of those factors, Caste is a common denominator, though there can be exceptions (comparing a SC IAS Officer and a Forward Caste Clerk in his office) we have to see the "normal" (statistical normal and not philosophical normal) behaviour
//we have to see the "normal" (statistical normal and not philosophical normal) behaviour//
.. and to find that "statistical normal" we need "statistical" data. That is the single point demand of the agitating students. One which is opposed tooth and nail by politicians especially from your home state.
Post a Comment