Indian Express Editorial Summary

Editorial Topic : Caveat in Jobs Data: Latest RBI KLEMS Database

 GS-2 Mains Exam : IR

 

Caveat in Jobs Data: Latest RBI KLEMS Database

Introduction

• KLEMS data used to counter poor job creation claims.
• Need to examine data methodology and sectoral details.

About KLEMS Database

• Covers capital, labor, energy, material, services (1980-2024).
• Measures productivity growth at industry and aggregate levels.
• Uses data from EUS, PLFS, National Account Statistics, Annual Survey of Industries.

Data Challenges

• Lack of yearly NSO data, interpolation used.
• Estimated worker-population ratio (WPR) multiplied by total population.
• Population data interpolated or from MoHFW projections.

Methodology Issues

• 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 data from Economic Survey 2021-22.
• 2020-21 onwards: MoHFW population projections.
• Uniform growth applied for rural/urban population projection.
• Worker numbers distributed among industries based on PLFS shares.

Data Flaws

• Overestimated population projections by MoHFW.
• Overestimated labor and workforce due to WPR multiplication.
• Majority of workers are unpaid family workers.
• Misleading employment claims without considering work quality.

Data Revelations

• Agriculture employment increased from 20 crore to 25 crore (2018-19 to 2022-23).
• Service sector employment increased from 17.2 crore to 20.2 crore.
• Manufacturing employment increased from 5.5 crore to 6.3 crore.
• Employment increase due to population growth and projection methodology, not WPR changes.

SBI’s Comparative Study

• Compared projected total employment from ASUSE with RBI KLEMS data.
• ASUSE covers a subset of unorganized enterprises, excluding construction, corporate, government, factories, cooperatives.

Methodological Limitations Conclusion

• Enterprise surveys show enterprise positions, not individual employment.
• MSME registration and EPFO subscription don’t equate to job creation.
• Methodological issues lead to confusion and inflated employment claims.

 

 

Indian Express Editorial Summary

Editorial Topic : A Port of No Return: Great Nicobar Port

 GS-3 Mains Exam : Environment Conservation

 

Introduction

• Focus on Great Nicobar port development.
• CRZ-1A classification and environmental clearance at the heart of the issue.

Ecological Significance of Galathea Bay

• CRZ-1A area: protected area with mangroves, corals, turtles, birds.
• Galathea Bay: critical nesting site for giant leatherback turtles.
• Other turtle species, coral colonies, mangroves, Nicobar megapode habitat present.
• Proposed as wildlife sanctuary in 1997 to conserve biodiversity.

Road to Port Development

• Sanctuary de-notified in January 2021 despite continued turtle nesting.
• MoEFCC’s EAC recommended and cleared the project in November 2022.
• NGT formed high-powered committee (HPC) to investigate.
• Project site still classified as CRZ-1A based on scientific records.

NCSCM Survey and Report

• HPC concluded port permissible in CRZ-1B but not CRZ-1A.
• NCSCM claimed no part of project area falls under CRZ-1A.

Conclusion: A Letdown for Ecology

• Area still has turtles, mangroves, megapodes, coral colonies (CRZ-1A).
• Port approval changes classification.
• Highlights “ecology vs. economy” debate.