UPSC Editorial Analysis: Analyzing India’s Public Expenditure on Education: The 6% GDP Promise vs Reality

Topic: Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, Human Resources.

Introduction

- The target of allocating 6% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to education has been India’s longest-standing policy goal in social infrastructure.

- According to data from the Union Budgets, Economic Surveys, and UNESCO reports, combined public expenditure (Centre and States) on education has stagnated between 8% and 4.1% of GDP over the last decade.

About Analyzing India’s Public Expenditure on Education: The 6% GDP Promise vs Reality

- Despite the 1968 Kothari Commission and NEP 2020 recommending 6% of GDP for education, India’s public spending stagnates around 8%–4.1%, constrained by low tax revenues and high non-discretionary expenditure.

Historical Evolution of the 6% Commitment

- Kothari Commission (1964–66):

- Observed that educational investment is critical to economic growth and recommended reaching 6% of national income by 1986.

- National Policy on Education (1968 & 1986):

- Endorsed the Kothari formula, emphasizing universal elementary access and standardizing school structures.

- Tapash Majumdar Committee (1999):

- Estimated the financial outlay needed to operationalize the fundamental right to elementary education, setting an incremental investment roadmap over a 10-year horizon.

- NEP 2020:

- Formally committed to increasing public investment in education to reach 6% of GDP at the earliest.

Current Fiscal Architecture: The Split Between Centre and States

Education is placed on the Concurrent List (Entry 25, List III) of the Seventh Schedule following the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976.

- Predominance of State Financing:

- States bear roughly three-fourths to four-fifths of total public spending on education. Consequently, a state’s fiscal health directly dictates its school infrastructure and learning environments.

- Central Outlays:

- Central allocation operates primarily through Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) such as Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan, PM-POSHAN (mid-day meals), and PM-SHRI, alongside funding for central universities and institutes of national importance.

Why Does Spending Remain Below the 6% Target?

- Macro-Fiscal and Revenue Constraints

-

- Low Tax-to-GDP Ratio: India’s general government tax-to-GDP ratio hovers around 16% to 18% (Centre plus States), significantly lower than OECD averages (around 34%) and several peer middle-income economies. This limits discretionary social-sector spending.

- Committed Expenditures: A significant portion of revenue receipts is consumed by non-discretionary payments: interest obligations, pensions, defense, and statutory transfers, squeezing fiscal space for human capital development.

- Fiscal Federalism Dynamics

-

- Matching Grant Burden: Centrally Sponsored Schemes like Samagra Shiksha follow a 60:40 fund-sharing pattern (90:10 for North-Eastern and Himalayan States). States experiencing tight fiscal deficits often struggle to provide matching grants on time, resulting in delayed fund releases and project stalls.

- Cess Utilization Issues: The Health and Education Cess (4% on income and corporate tax) is collected to supplement social outlays. Parliamentary standing committee reports and CAG audits have repeatedly observed that proceeds collected under cesses are not always transferred into non-lapsable dedicated funds in the same financial year.

- Composition and Quality of Spending

-

- Revenue vs. Capital Expenditure: Over 85% to 90% of education allocations go toward revenue expenditure (primarily salaries, administrative overheads, and establishment costs). Capital expenditure—such as building digital classrooms, modern science laboratories, and library networks—receives marginal resources.

- Absorptive Capacity Bottlenecks: Delays in administrative approvals, bureaucratic procedures in public financial management systems (PFMS), and delayed utilization certificates (UCs) from districts frequently lead to under-utilization of allocated funds before the financial year closes.

Multi-Dimensional Implications of Underfunding

- Pedagogical and Learning Crises

-

- Foundational Learning Gaps: Annual Status of Education Report (ASER) findings routinely reveal that a substantial fraction of Grade 5 students struggle to read a Grade 2 textbook or solve basic division problems, highlighting gaps in foundational literacy and numeracy (FLN).

- Secondary School Dropouts: While primary school Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) is near 100%, secondary and higher secondary completion rates drop significantly, largely due to a lack of nearby secondary schools, transport, and functional sanitation facilities for girls.

- Economic Burden and Rising Inequality

-

- Regressive Out-of-Pocket Expenditure (OOPE): Due to quality gaps in state-run systems, families across all income levels turn to private schools and parallel coaching centers.

- Demographic Dividend at Risk: India’s median age is roughly 28 years. If youth lack high-quality schooling and technical training, the demographic dividend risks transforming into a demographic drag characterized by underemployment and structural skill mismatches.

- Research and Higher Education Deficits

-

- Low R&D Intensity: India spends around 0.65% to 0.7% of GDP on Research & Development, compared to over 2% in China and roughly 3.5% in the US.

- Commercialization Deficits: Higher education institutions (HEIs) struggle with faculty shortages, equipment deficits, and limited patent filings, curtailing their ability to act as innovation hubs.

Comparative Global Context

Data Source: UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report & Economic Survey.

Constitutional and Judicial Perspective

- Article 21A:

- Inserted via the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2002, makes free and compulsory education a Fundamental Right for children aged 6 to 14.

- RTE Act, 2009:

- Provides the statutory basis for pupil-teacher ratios, school infrastructure norms, and non-discrimination.

- Judicial Precedents:

- In Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (1992) and Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993), the Supreme Court established that the Right to Life (Article 21) cannot be realized without the Right to Education, asserting that state resources must follow fundamental rights guarantees.

Way Forward:

- Phased Public Investment Path:

- Establish an agreed schedule between the Union and States to scale allocations from ~4.1% to 6% by 2030, supported by dedicated revenue mechanisms.

- Strengthen Non-Lapsable Funds:

- Ensure all collections from education cesses are promptly credited to non-lapsable pools like the Prarambhik Shiksha Kosh (PSK) and Madhyamik aur Uchhatar Shiksha Kosh (MUSK) to insulate school budgets from annual fiscal compression.

- Shift to Outcome-Based Budgeting:

- Tie incremental grant dispersals under schemes like Samagra Shiksha to measurable improvements in Foundational Literacy and Numeracy (FLN) and lower dropout rates, shifting the focus from input tracking to learning outcomes.

- Alleviate State Fiscal Constraints:

- The Finance Commission could consider introducing performance-based grants or adjusting the horizontal devolution formula to incentivize states that sustain education spending above 15% of their aggregate budgetary expenditure.

- Modernize School Infrastructure (PM-SHRI Model):

- Expand the coverage of model schools, ensuring funds support digital connectivity, science laboratories, and inclusive infrastructure for children with special needs (CwSN).

Conclusion

- Achieving the goal of a $5 trillion to $10 trillion knowledge-driven economy depends on human development. The 6% of GDP target is an investment in civic capacity, economic productivity, and social mobility.

- Moving from declaration to execution requires sustained fiscal backing, cooperative federal coordination, and efficient fund utilization.

Powered by शिक्षा खबर Skillogy