I am trying to analyse the effects of income-based reservations in terms their effect on
representation of SC, ST and OBC. Consider the case of 10% income based reservation introduced by Central government. It is
generally assumed that since income based reservation carves a separate 10% of
resources (seats at education institute or jobs) than already existing quota,
it will not harm the interest of groups already provided the reserved access. This harm argument assumes that the representation of social groups (SC,
ST and OBC) will remain unchanged since new reservation is above/different than the pre-existing reservation. This naïve belief assumes that candidates
from these social groups access the resource only through reservation. This assumption is not accurate (at least in all cases) and hence any new reservation is
likely to change the representation of the social groups. The change in social
group representation has welfare consequences as government jobs hold varying
importance in term of upward mobility for different social groups.
I illustrate my case
with the example of representation of social groups among Maharashtra state
employees. Consider the table which shows the representation of social groups
among government employees in Maharashtra in 2015. The table shows that
proportion of SC, ST and OBC is considerably more than the reservation
percentage. Such surplus representation can result only when candidates access
the resource outside the reserved access.
Table 1: Representation of social groups in Maharashtra government employees
|
Social group
|
Reservation (in
%)
|
Representation
(in %)
|
Surplus (in %)
|
Surplus to
non-reserved resource ratio (in %)
|
|
SC
|
13
|
18.1
|
5.1
|
10.6
|
|
ST
|
7
|
9.3
|
2.3
|
4.8
|
|
OBC
|
19
|
24.7
|
5.7
|
11.9
|
|
SBC (Special
Backward class)
|
2
|
2.5
|
0.5
|
1.0
|
|
VJ and NT
(Vimukt Jati and Nomadic tribes)
|
11
|
13.8
|
2.8
|
5.8
|
|
Others
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source:
Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Maharashtra, report 2015
|
||||
As per the 2015
report, Maharashtra government has 115490 vacancies, posts which are sanctioned
and yet to be filled. In November 2018, Maratha community has been awarded 16%
reservation. In February 2019, 10% reservation for economically weaker section
(EWS) households from social groups not belonging to those mentioned in table
as well as from Maratha community is provided. The seats outside any
reservation are now at 22%. I assume that surplus representation is
proportional to proportion of resource outside the reservation. If resource
outside reservation reduces in size, without any change in inclination of
candidates from any social group to access the social group, then absolute
surplus will decline, though proportion will be maintained. There is some
uncertainty about whether newly declared reservations will be applicable to
recruitments declared before announcements of these reservations. I have
assumed that new reservation will be applicable to all future recruitments.
The new
representation, for all 737310 posts will be as follows:
Table 2: How social group representation will change after newly introduced
reservations
|
Social Group
|
Before Maratha and
EWS reservations (as of 2015)
|
After Maratha and
EWS reservations (considering recruitment for additional 165490 posts)
|
Change in
representation ( - is decline)
|
|
SC
|
18.1
|
15.3
|
-15.5
|
|
ST
|
9.3
|
8.1
|
-12.9
|
|
OBC
|
24.7
|
21.6
|
-12.6
|
|
SBC
|
2.6
|
2.3
|
-11.5
|
|
VJ and NT
|
13.8
|
12.3
|
-10.9
|
|
Other
|
31.6
|
40.5
|
28.2
|
|
Source:
Directorate of Economics and Statistic, Maharashtra 2015 report and author’s
own calculations
|
|||
The representation
will undergo a considerable change. There is 10 to 15 % change in the
representation of social groups.
The surplus
representation observed for Maharashtra government employees is not an anomaly.
As per the answer given in parliament on 28-03-2018, as of 1-1- 2016, the
representation of SC, ST and OBCs in 77 out 79 departments together were as
follows: SC – 17.49%, ST- 8.47% and OBC- 21.57%. There is surplus for SC and
ST, but deficit for OBC. (The reservation percentages are 15% for SC, 7.5% for
ST and 27% for OBC) OBC reservation started about 25 years back while SC and ST
reservations were in place much before that.
The surplus is an
indicator that access to resources in not solely contingent on reservation for
the social groups entitled for reservation. This is contrary to popular belief
that certain social groups can access the resource only because they have
reservation. The reality being contradictory to this popular myth is a welcome
finding. At the same time, it means new reservations will not be representation
neutral. They are likely to increase the representation of social groups newly
entitled for the reservation at the cost of social groups entitled for
reservation before new groups.
If government
employment is the most likely well-paying employment for individuals in certain
social group, the decrease in representation is likely to result in decrease in
welfare for these social groups. From the point of view of whole society, a
utilitarian justification to accept this decrease is larger increase in welfare
for social groups newly entitled for reservation. What we can say with high
level of certitude is changes in reservations will have its winners and losers.
SC, ST and OBC groups are likely to see fall in their representation and other
social groups will see rise in their representation. The changes in
representation will have implications for probability of upwardly mobile
employment and resultant well-being. Unaddressed welfare loss of social groups
can lead to eruption of discontent in the future and threaten the greater
national project. It is imperative that such potentiality is addressed before
it becomes a problematic reality.