Home > Uncategorized > 2004 State Rankings – Chief Minister Performance

2004 State Rankings – Chief Minister Performance


State Rankings

Based on the results, the states are shown in the ranking order for each of the 95 ranked criteria. Whether a high Standard Value reflects good or bad performance depends on what the data is intended to measure and which competitiveness factor it is in. Factor-wise rankings are then determined by calculating the average of the Standard Values of all the ranked criteria, which make up each factor. This average is found by dividing the sum of the Standard Values of the ranked criteria by the number of ranked criteria. This enables us to “lock” the weight of the factors independently of the number of criteria they contain so that each factor has an equal impact on the overall ranking. Each criterion, whether from hard data or from survey data, is weighted equally in determining the average Standard Value in each factor. Wherever data is not available for a particular state, the missing values are replaced by a Standard Value 0.

Next, we arrive at the factor average Standard Values to determine the Competitiveness Factor rankings. The Standard Values of the Competitiveness Factors are then aggregated to determine the Overall Competitiveness Rankings. All the ranked criteria in the five Competitiveness Factors are thus covered in the Overall Competitiveness Rankings. Since all the values are standardized, they can be aggregated to compute the indexes. We use these indexes to compute the rankings for the five Competitiveness Factors and the Overall Competitiveness Scoreboard.

For purpose of presentation and comparison of the state rankings we grouped all the states in to two categories based on the size in terms of population, i.e., the bigger states and the smaller states. Overall Competitiveness Rankings of the states are given in table 1. State-wise Factor Competitiveness rankings are given in tables 2 – 6. The states are ranked according to the detailed 95 criteria in tables 7 – 11.

Based on the rankings obtained by the states for each of the 95 criteria (Tables 7 – 11), we have identified the strengths and weaknesses for each state (Tables 12-40). Strong criteria indicate that the state has considerable competitiveness (high rank) vis-à-vis the rest of the states in terms of those criteria. Similarly, weak criteria indicate that the state has low competitiveness (lower rank) vis-à-vis other states. It should be noted that this identification is not based on any international norm or comparison.

References

World Competitiveness Yearbook (2004), Institute for Management Development (IMD), Lausanne, Switzerland

Global Competitiveness Report ( 2004), World Economic Forum (WEF), Geneva, Switzerland

A.T. Kearney (2004), FDI Confidence Index, Global Management Consulting Firm, Chicago, US

Goldman Sachs (2003), Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050, by Dominic Wilson and Roopa Purushotaman, Global Economics Paper No. 99

National Productivity Council (1992a), Human Development in Indian States, Productivity, Vol. 33, No.2, July-September

National Productivity Council (1992b), Infrastructure Development in Indian States, Productivity, Vol.33, No.3, October-December

National Productivity Council (1994), Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States, Productivity, Vol. 35, No.2, July-September

Business Today (1995), Competitive Advantage of Indian States, June 7- 21

Business Today (1997), Best States to Invest in, Dec 22, 1997 – Jan 6, 1998

Business Today (B 1999), Best States to Invest in, Dec 22, 1999 – Jan 6, 2000

National Council of Applied Economic Research (2000), Policy Competitiveness of Indian States in Attracting Direct Investment

Confederation of Indian Industries & Rajiv Gandhi Institute for Contemporary Studies (2000) Performance of the Indian States

India Today (2003), Small is Beautiful – India’s Best and Worst States: The State of the States, May 19

India Today (2004), North South Lead – India’s Best and Worst States: The State of the States, August 16

Ranking of states (graphical representation)

There were wide variations in the Overall Competitiveness among the bigger Indian states Maharashtra came to the top of the list with a Standard Value of 0.543. Punjab with a Standard Value of 0.524 came the second followed by Gujarat (0.511). Karnataka (0.478) and Kerala (0.452) came to the fourth and fifth positions respectively. The Standard Values of UP (-0.106) and Assam (-0.238) at the bottom of the list were found far lower.

Table 1 Overall Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States
Bigger States STD Values Rank
Maharashtra 0.543 1
Punjab 0.524 2
Gujarat 0.511 3
Karnataka 0.478 4
Kerala 0.452 5
Tamil Nadu 0.440 6
AP 0.233 7
Haryana 0.090 8
WB -0.023 9
MP -0.066 10
Orissa -0.091 11
Rajasthan -0.091 12
Bihar -0.100 13
UP -0.106 14
Assam -0.238 15

Wide variations were noted among bigger Indian states in the case of Competitiveness Factor Economic Strength. Maharashtra on the top of the list recorded a Standard Value as high as 0.750 (Fig 2). The next in the list, Tamil Nadu, achieved a Standard Value significantly lower, 0.197, closely followed by Karnataka (0.189). Assam (-0.623) and Orissa (-0.674) were at the bottom of the list.

Table 2 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Economic Strength
Bigger States STD Values Rank
Maharashtra 0.750 1
Tamil Nadu 0.197 2
Karnataka 0.189 3
Gujarat 0.142 4
Punjab 0.140 5
Kerala 0.130 6
WB 0.099 7
AP 0.040 8
Haryana -0.091 9
UP -0.242 10
Bihar -0.271 11
Rajasthan -0.353 12
MP -0.413 13
Assam -0.623 14
Orissa -0.674 15

Wide variations were found among the bigger Indian states in the case of Competitiveness Factor Business Efficiency too. Maharashtra on the top of the list recorded a Standard Value as high as 0.990 (Fig 3). The next best state, Gujarat, achieved a Standard Value significantly lower, 0.779. The third in the list, Punjab had a score only of 0.402. West Bengal and Bihar at the bottom of the table were found with very low Standard Values, -0.254 and -0.401 respectively.

Table 3 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Business Efficiency
Bigger States STD Values Rank
Maharashtra 0.990 1
Gujarat 0.779 2
Punjab 0.402 3
Karnataka 0.225 4
Tamil Nadu 0.198 5
MP 0.151 6
Haryana 0.112 7
AP 0.092 8
Orissa 0.039 9
UP -0.003 10
Rajasthan -0.014 11
Kerala -0.016 12
Assam -0.138 13
WB -0.254 14
Bihar -0.401 15


Karnataka with a Standard Value of 1.194 came on the top of bigger Indian states in the case of Governance Quality closely followed by Kerala (1.074) and AP (1.003) (Fig. 4). Standard Values of the lowest in the list viz. Maharashtra and Rajastan were found far lower, 0.027 and -0.310 respectively.

Table 4 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Governance Quality

Bigger States STD Values Rank
Karnataka 1.194 1
Kerala 1.074 2
AP 1.003 3
Gujarat 0.939 4
Tamil Nadu 0.776 5
Punjab 0.733 6
Bihar 0.710 7
Haryana 0.691 8
UP 0.317 9
Assam 0.199 10
WB 0.177 11
Orissa 0.160 12
MP 0.065 13
Maharashtra 0.027 14
Rajasthan -0.310 15

Significantly wide variations were observed among the bigger states in the case of Human Resources. The list was headed by the highest literacy state in the country, Kerala with a Standard Value of 0.640 followed by Maharashtra (0.623) and Punjab (0.592). At the bottom of the list were Bihar (-0. 362) and UP (-0.465) (Fig. 5).

Table 5 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Human Resources
Bigger States STD Values Rank
Kerala 0.640 1
Maharashtra 0.623 2
Punjab 0.592 3
Tamil Nadu 0.560 4
Karnataka 0.504 5
Gujarat 0.408 6
Rajasthan 0.085 7
Haryana 0.049 8
AP 0.038 9
WB -0.212 10
MP -0.285 11
Orissa -0.285 12
Assam -0.296 13
Bihar -0.362 14
UP -0.465 15

Inter-state variations among bigger states in regard to Infrastructure were found to be very high. Punjab (0.751) headed the list followed by Tamil Nadu (0.469) and Kerala (0.435). Haryana (-0.309) and Assam (-0.330) were at the bottom of the list (Fig. 6).

Table 6 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Infrastructure
Bigger States STD Values Rank
Punjab 0.751 1
Tamil Nadu 0.469 2
Kerala 0.435 3
Maharashtra 0.324 4
Orissa 0.306 5
Gujarat 0.285 6
Karnataka 0.279 7
MP 0.151 8
Rajasthan 0.136 9
WB 0.074 10
AP -0.007 11
UP -0.139 12
Bihar -0.178 13
Haryana -0.309 14
Assam -0.330 15


As in the case of bigger states significant inter-state variations were observed among the smaller states in regard to Overall Competitiveness. Goa with a Standard Value of 0.776 came to the top followed very closely by Delhi (0.775). Himachal Pradesh (0.291) and Mizoram (0.172) at the third and fourth places respectively achieved significantly lower Standard Values. Nagaland at the bottom of the list recorded a Standard Value of -0.332 (Fig.7).

Table 7 Overall Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States
Smaller States STD Values Rank
Goa 0.776 1
Delhi 0.775 2
HP 0.291 3
Mizoram 0.172 4
Uttaranchal 0.144 5
Jharkhand 0.110 6
Arunachal 0.079 7
Sikkim 0.064 8
Chattisgarh -0.011 9
J&K -0.109 10
Tripura -0.166 11
Manipur -0.211 12
Meghalaya -0.220 13
Nagaland -0.332 14
- - -

Vast variations were seen among the smaller states in the case of Economic Strength. First in the list, Delhi with a Standard Value of 2.028 was far ahead of Goa (0.888) in the second and Uttaranchal (0.606) in the third. At the bottom of the list was Jharkhand with a Standard Value –0.504 followed by Arunachal (-0.744) (Fig. 8).

Table 8 Factor Competitiveness Ranking of Indian States – Economic Strength
Smaller States STD Values Rank
Delhi 2.028 1
Goa 0.888 2
Uttaranchal 0.606 3
Tripura 0.091 4
HP -0.048 5
J&K -0.057 6
Chattisgarh -0.124 7
Mizoram -0.133 8
Sikkim -0.199 9
Manipur -0.271 10
Nagaland -0.377 11
Meghalaya -0.416 12
Jharkhand -0.504 13
Arunachal -0.744 14
- - -

Vast variations were observed among the smaller states in regard to Business Efficiency as well. Goa with a Standard Value of 0.864 came to the top of the list followed closely by Delhi (0.833). Sikkim (-0.629) and Nagaland (-0.673) remained at the bottom of the list (Fig. 9)

Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: