Mohammad Ahsanul Karim :
Why Bangladesh was peculiar poor after 1947? Why poverty was increasing during 1947-89? Conventional answers are for natural calamities, low natural resources, dense population, or low GDP growth rate, external exploitation, etc. Nobody devalues those but this answer would not be appropriate even to the 1st question. Because, in Sultan-Mughal-British era Bengal was rich region in Asia.
As the GDP growth rate was over the population during 1947-89, answers to 2nd question would be inappropriate. Natural calamities remain same. While population increased four times and agricultural land also decreased. Nonetheless, per capita income is increased multiple times. Natural calamities and resources are constraints and were not the causes of poor and increasing poverty after 1947.
This paper describes the underlying causes of both slow and sharp rise of poverty in Bangladesh. Population and economic data of BBS and WB are varied. Time series data also vary with the change of base year. Qualitative analyses, therefore, are more important here than the quantitative one. This essay is based ondata of BBS and Banglapedia with reference to scholastic books-essays including author’s ones.
Poverty of Bangladesh
The word poor refers primarily to a relative, but poverty is an absolute issue as has a threshold. Consumption level below the humanity level is poverty; and. hardcore poverty is the lower level that weakens physical and mental health. In the absence of required public policies, poverty is common in all countries. Poverty usually increases temporarily after great calamities. Famine happens when poverty rises to starvation level.
In Sultan era, newly created Bango (1352-1576) became a rich country in the agrarian global. In Mughal Empire, Bango province (1608-1703) were further rich. After making Bengal-Bihar-Orissa a new province (1704), Sube-Bongo sharply deteriorated, and hurt by severe famine with death-casualty of few millions (1770). Poverty remained a couple years but was not increasing.
After administrative (1789) and feudal land (1793) reforms as Britain, Suba-Bango again became a higher growing region. For competitive trade (1832) and all Indian integrity with capital at Calcutta (1858), Bengal-Presidency got higher motion. Separating Assam a region (1874), and Bihar-Orissa a province (1912), Bengal province become lower growing. Yet except in 1943, it did not suffer from rising poverty.
East Bengal/Bangladesh instantly became a peculiar poor region in global history after partition in 1947. Since then, mass poverty was increasing. It sharply increased temporarily to 83% in 1974. While stable increasing poverty rose to about 74% in 1982. Then it remained zigzagging during 1983-89. Bangladesh freed from curse of increasing poverty from 1989/90. Thereafter, poverty was decreasing constantly.
Socio-Economic Scenarios of Bangladesh after 1947:
As British held Suba-Bongo/Bengal-Presidency from Muslim Rulers, Hindu-Bengalis were privileged, and Muslim-Bengalis were deprived about 7 generations under communal policies. After making Bihar-Orissa a province (1912), Muslim-Bengalis became majority in Bengal. For local and provincial representative governments, polity became increasing communal and conflicting; and Bengal is divided in 1947.
People ratio of Hindu and Muslim Bangalis were 44% and 56% in Bengal, 29% and 71%, in East Bengal, and changed to 26% and 74% after adding Sylhet. Hindu-Bengalis were almost owners of land, industries, banks, businesses, buildings, etc. Muslim-Bengalis were rural living people in lower income strata. Urban people were 21.7% in W. Bengal. It was 3.6% in E. Bengal where Muslim Bangalis were 1.2%! (1941).
Usual distribution of people in five income strata by Muslim-Hindu family institutions is about 3.3%, 6.5%, 12.9%, 25.8 % and 51.5%. Income ratios of them are about 16:8:4:2:1 at senior age. Highest-lowest income ratios at senior and senior-junior ages are about 16:1 and 32:1. In Feudalism-Capitalism, those were about 24:1 and 48:1. In semi-feudal Bengal, those were likely 20:1 and 40:1 as were declining over generations.
Deprived shares of Muslim-Bengalis in agrarian eastern Bengal in upper three income strata were about 93%, 62%, and 31% less from their population ratio. Land-wealth-capital shares were further less. Changed was insignificant after adding Sylhet. East Bengal started as a peculiar poor country with very low-level leader-entrepreneur-educated people as well as urban, industrial and social services sectors.
Mass land ownership for democratic land reforms (1950) along with Muslim family-social laws strengthened their democratic social, economic, cultural, and political lives. Consequently, both GDP and population growth rate rose. However, the GDP growth rate of East and West Pakistan was about 4.0%, and 5.8%. As political and economic disparities increased, East and West Pakistan are separated.
Laws and institutions of governance were the same after 1971 except the finance and industrial policies. Instead of that the freedom and fundamental rights of the people were declining, governance was increasing tyrant, and political regime was becoming more conflicting. Most important issue was that poverty of Bangladesh was sharply rose during 1972-82. A couple hundred thousand people died from famine.
Causes of Increasing Poverty During 1947-89
Higher, and higher-middle income people of East Bengal migrated mostly by 1953. Middle, lower-middle and lower income strata migrated slowly also for their caste-wise marriage custom. Consequently, a natural reshuffling in national income strata started to fill up the migrated vacuum in E. Bengal after like liquid.It would end over three generations at decreasing rate as vacuum is lessening.
Lower-middle strata could maintain their share, but lower-income strata had to bear the poverty curse. Deprivationrate rose likely 28% more when the GDP growth rate fall for natural and political calamities. In simple average estimation, starting deprivation rate was likely 3.8% with about 0.04% decreasing rate. Poverty increased in 1947-70 as that rate were 3.3% against per capita GDP growth rate 2.0%.
Poverty sharply rose after returning refugees from India as the GDP was about 14.5 % less in 1971/72 for Independence War; and low foreign aids to recover it. It was aggravated for new economy’s structural limits, hyper-inflation, and rise of imported commodity price crises as well as the per capita GDP growth rate declined to 0.1% in 1972-74 for industrial and financial policies, flood of 1974, political crises, etc.
Poverty level was zigzagging during 1983-89 as per capita GDP growth rate was zigzagging to the decreasing deprivation rate reduced to 1.8% instead of 1.4% in 1998/89 for floods in 1984, 1987 and 1988. People under poverty started decreasing from 1989/90 i.e., in end-year of Ershad-era. Professional Economist/Statisticians may provide more scholastic estimates on this issue year by year since 1947.
Causes of Reducing Poverty From 1989
Deprivation rate gradually decreased from 3.8% to 1.8% during 1947-89 by itself as law of refilling the decreasing vacuum. So, poverty was increasing as long as prevailing decreasing deprivation rate was higher than the per capita GDP growth rate. The average growth rate of 1950-70 (2.0%) was higher than 1972-89 (1.4%). So, natural resource constraints or external exploitation was not reason for increasing poverty.
As the curse of ‘increasing poverty’ vanished by itself, it didnot increase or decrease by government or others’ actions during 1947-89. Author is not expert in sectoral, sectional, and micro studies of national of poverty as like as Nobel LaureatesA Sen and A Banerjee, orW Mahmud, HZ Rahman,M Hossain, B Sen and other. He unveils new scopes for scholastic study of “increasing poverty of Bangladesh.
(Mohammad Ahsanul Karim is initiator of basic democratic structural and institutional reforms in Bangladesh since 1982. He is author of Progressive Democracy (1991), Points of ConstitutionAmendment (2010), Statement Submitted to Bangladesh Supreme Court (2011) and articles on democratic reforms. He completed master’s in Economics (UD, BD); Master’s in International Political Economy and Master’s in Public Affairs (UTD, USA). He was in BCS’82 Batch.)
