top of page

By:

Anusreeta Dutta

26 April 2026 at 1:22:24 pm

One Maharashtra, Unequal Priorities

Six decades after statehood, constitutional safeguards remain necessary to bridge the gap between western Maharashtra and the regions left behind. Maharashtra is often referred to as India’s economic engine. The state, which is home to Mumbai’s financial ecosystem and Pune’s industrial corridor, contributes about 14 percent to the GDP of India. There is a long-standing dispute behind this achievement that has affected state politics for decades. Is every district in Maharashtra thriving at...

One Maharashtra, Unequal Priorities

Six decades after statehood, constitutional safeguards remain necessary to bridge the gap between western Maharashtra and the regions left behind. Maharashtra is often referred to as India’s economic engine. The state, which is home to Mumbai’s financial ecosystem and Pune’s industrial corridor, contributes about 14 percent to the GDP of India. There is a long-standing dispute behind this achievement that has affected state politics for decades. Is every district in Maharashtra thriving at the same pace? It is not just a political question. It is written into the Constitution proper. Unlike most states in India, Maharashtra has a unique constitutional provision under Article 371(2) which empowers the Governor to ensure that development funding and opportunities are equally shared between Vidarbha, Marathwada and the rest of Maharashtra. The clause was born out of fears that some areas would be forgotten once the state was established in 1960. Six decades later, the existence of this constitutional safeguard raises an uncomfortable question: why does Maharashtra need tools to balance regional development still? Regional Disparity The seeds of regional disparity were sown long before the birth of Maharashtra. Western Maharashtra had early investments in irrigation, cooperative sugar mills, educational institutions and transportation. The centres of industrial growth followed by agricultural commercialisation were Pune, Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and part of Nashik. Vidarbha and Marathwada chose the other. Agriculture was still heavily dependent on monsoon rains, industrialization was slow and irrigation coverage was less than the state averages. Regional studies in Maharashtra have repeatedly shown that irrigation intensity and agricultural yield are higher in western districts than in much of eastern Maharashtra. These differences subsequently led to calls for institutional safeguards. In contrast, in western Maharashtra, government moves are increasingly geared towards growth, not deficit reduction. The region’s success is built on industrial corridors, logistics infrastructure, urban mobility projects and advanced manufacturing clusters. Pune has emerged as a hub for vehicles, computer technology, defence production and startups. Mumbai remains a major draw for investment in metro rail networks, coastal roadways, financial services infrastructure and international business zones. Agricultural practices in western Maharashtra are in a relatively advanced stage of development. Irrigation coverage is much better than many districts in the east, so the authorities can concentrate on raising productivity, export-oriented, value-added farming and agro-processing industries. Western Maharashtra’s policy, in a nutshell, is to make competitive regions more competitive. Eastern Maharashtra is very different. Here, the Governments have not only focused on accelerating growth but also on reducing the backlog of development. The main policy question is irrigation. For many decades official studies have consistently identified irrigation as the most important factor for regional disparities. Even with dedicated funds, the backlog of irrigation in Vidarbha and Marathwada kept growing, requiring repeated interventions by successive governments. To tackle this, region-specific irrigation corporations, such as Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC) and Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation (GMIDC) were established with a specific mandate to speed up water infrastructure projects. The Union Government has sanctioned a special irrigation package for Vidarbha, Marathwada and draught prone areas of Maharashtra, with an objective to increase irrigation potential and improve water security of the farmers. Even today, a lot of public money is spent on irrigation projects in eastern Maharashtra. Government affidavits and parliamentary replies say crores of rupees are spent every year to make up for irrigation shortfalls and to finish long-pending projects. This emphasis reflects an important reality: while the western part of Maharashtra talks about competitiveness, the eastern part of Maharashtra continues to debate water access. Another area where there are divergent approaches is industrial policy. Market forces have played a major role in the industrial expansion of western Maharashtra, a process assisted by the existing infrastructure and urbanization. In contrast, Eastern Maharashtra has frequently depended on state-led interventions to draw investment to lagging regions. Projects such as the Multi-modal International Cargo Hub and Airport at Nagpur (MIHAN), logistics corridors, special industrial incentives and infrastructure subsidies were to divert industrial expansion away from the Mumbai-Pune region. Likewise, recent government announcements have earmarked Vidarbha to become a future hub for solar energy, semiconductors, aerospace manufacturing and logistics, with Marathwada being pitched for electric vehicle and electronics investments. Whereas in western Maharashtra, the policy tends to buttress pre-existing advantages, in eastern Maharashtra the industrial policy aims to generate such advantages from the beginning. Regional Equilibrium These divisions have persisted, leading to separate institutions of governance. Vidarbha and Marathwada have statutory development boards to monitor regional imbalances and recommend corrective actions. Their emergence is an indication of a broader acceptance that market forces alone have not been adequate to promote balanced growth in Maharashtra. The second capital of Maharashtra is also Nagpur. The same ideology. The state legislature meets every winter in eastern Maharashtra to ensure that the issues concerning the region remain in the political focus. The issues discussed generally are irrigation, agriculture, tribal welfare and regional development in these sessions. The controversy over regional equity, however, is still unresolved. According to critics, despite decades of special packages and focused strategies, many irrigation projects continue to face delays, cost overruns and implementation problems. Several big projects in Vidarbha remain incomplete despite years of cash pledges. There is now a growing body of policy thinking that suggests that Maharashtra may have to give up the very terminology of backlog elimination. In its own discussion on balanced regional development, the state attaches more importance to reforms in governance, diversification of the economy and speeding up growth, than to compensatory spending. The challenge is not just building canals and roadways anymore but building lasting economic ecosystems that can hold on to talent, draw investment and create jobs beyond the traditional Mumbai-Pune boom corridor. The real test for Maharashtra will be whether future policies can turn Vidarbha and Marathwada from regions requiring special support to regions capable of driving growth on their own. Till then Maharashtra’s development story will be two stories. (The author is a columnist and climate researcher with experience in political research analysis and energy policy. Views personal.)

Indian Shipbuilding A Must Win Marathon

Shipbuilding

With a coastline of 7500 KM, it is hard to imagine, that for the first 20 years (1947-1967) India had no ‘shipping ministry’. In 1967 a Shipping ministry “coupled” with ROAD transport was established. Since then, this ministry has been on a name changing ride, not once, not twice but six times. In 2009 the “ROAD Transport and Highways” was de-coupled and ‘Shipping’ ministry was formed. Turning point came in 2015 with a clear maritime vision for 2030 and 2047. Ministry was re-christened, aptly to Ministry of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” in 2020.


Why is Shipbuilding important for a country?

a. A Shipyard becomes an opportunity hub and like a queen bee requires the support of an industrial colony to manufacture machinery and equipment.

b. National Shipyards support fleet renewal needs of the Navy.

c. Contributes to national GDP, increases inflow of FOREX.


Korea shipbuilding is 8% of GDP. Japan’s automobile industry is 2.9% of GDP. India’s shipbuilding a meagre 0.000578% of GDP. In context, India’s pharmaceutical industry, ranked third largest in the world is 1.72% of India’s GDP.


International Shipbuilding Market

The market is estimated to reach around USD 200 billion by 2029, growing at a CAGR of 4.84%. While India is at bottom with 0.07% of world share, behind Philippines 1.5% and Vietnam 1%, however on the positive side, India has done well in taking care of its defence needs, with 37 of 39 Naval ships being built in India yards. Rear Admiral S Shrikhande researching on maritime as a Fellow at Wollongong University, Australia, says “Shipbuilding in India needs both, serious incentivisation and dogged determination and not harping on being a big ship breaking country. That Garden Reach shipyard has a $54 million order for merchant ships from a German owner, is a good sign.”


Were Shipyards of 20th century in Flight mode?

Prominent shipyards in India were built in the colonial period. Mazagon Dock 1774, Garden reach 1884, Hindustan shipyard 1941 to cater to British navy and merchant fleet needs. Cochin shipyard 1972, Adani Katupalli 2013, Reliance Naval and Engineering, Rajula Gujarat 1997 and others have limited capacity, hence a lot more work to do. Capt. Subhangshu Dutt (Singapore) a mariner and now a shipowner, says “GOI should hold hands in any collaboration till the marriage with the foreign entity is reasonably stable. He also suggests that “new shipbuilding sites should be given to existing successful shipyards since they have decades of experience and talent. Consortium of 3 or more parties may also be good idea”.


Shipbuilding GOLD

As per SPLASH report the demand for LCO2 carriers could reach 2,500 ships by 2050. As per other estimates, 40% of global fleet of ships could have wind propulsion by 2050. A surge in such vessels is due to an unparallel waves of decarbonization in the shipping industry. Demand for ships with ‘carbon neutral’ badges, such as Dual fuel, Wind assisted, Nuclear fuel ships, Hydrogen powered ships, Liquified CO2 (LCO2) carrier, is outstripping supply. A must in the ‘bucket list’ of every Shipyard. Pinning down a standard ROI in shipbuilding is not easy, but experts suggest it could range from 4% to 15% for the high demand ‘carbon neutral’ ships. While an LNG new build vessel could cost US$ 250 million upwards.


International collaboration

On China’s shipbuilding success story, Manoj Pandalanghat (Singapore) a mariner and ship owner believes that “China has around 50 active Shipyards. Each have a few large dry docks. In each dock two or more large vessels are built simultaneously. Thus, a single yard is able to roll out 2/3 vessels/month, 36 vessels/year and 50 shipyards roll out 1800 vessels/year”.


China could be a jaldi-5, but India needs a sturdy Mount Fiji. Besides technology, Japanese bring the most important hand baggage of soft-skills and culture, essential for success from keel laying to delivery. Maruti’s is a standing example.


Food for thought for New Delhi

a. Expertise: Hire Naval Architects and shipbuilding experts with current international experience.

b. Government assistance: Land, Financial support, subsidies and timebound clearances.

c. Monitoring: PMO should monitor the first 5 to 10 years till Shipbuilding takes-off on this long-haul flight to destination 2047.


India’s Shipbuilding is expected to grow to $237 billion by year 2047. On a back of the envelope calculations this works out to about 4% of India’s 2047 projected GDP of $ 5 trillion. While cars are driven on roads, however the Ministry of roads and transport has little to do with “Automobile manufacturing”. On a similar note, ‘Shipbuilding’ as an industry has little to do with Ports, Shipping and Waterways, thus it may be worthwhile to consider a separate ‘Ship-building’ wing in the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways headed by a dynamic cabinet rank minister. Since 2047 targets are stiff and an uphill task, so in all probabilities, the officials in Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways are likely to push beneath the carpet, delays and failures of Shipbuilding with sweet success stories of “Ports, Shipping and Waterways” and if this does happen then India will not only miss the Shipbuilding bus of 21st century but a lot more from a national security and strategic perspective.


(The author is a Shipping and Marine consultant. Member Singapore Shipping Association and empaneled with IMO as a specialist consultant. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page