Maharashtra. One of the 28 states of India. In literal translation, its name means 'Bigger or Greater Nation'. However, we are not here on the etymology of the name of India's second most populous state and the third largest in terms of size. There was a time in the 1960s, 70s and the 80s, when Maharashtra was indeed recognised for many attributes of greatness ― as a leader in industrialization, as a pioneer in the cooperative movement, as a high-performer in the quality of administration, etc. Its people could proudly say, with some justification, "Mera Maharashtra Mahan". Not any more.

As the state prepares to elect a new legislative assembly on October 13, the new government ― whatever its complexion and composition might be ― faces a daunting set of development challenges. Consider the following stark facts, all culled from the Planning Commission's latest (2007) 'Maharashtra Development Report', a well-researched document of over 400 pages.

It is a paradox that, in spite of having the highest per capita income in the country (mostly due to the contribution of Mumbai), Maharashtra's economic growth has tumbled since the mid-nineties. While growth has declined for India as a whole, the sharpest decline, among 14 major states, has been in Maharashtra.

The state's performance in the social sector, as seen by its human development indicators, is pretty disappointing. Around 50% of its rural population does not still have easy access to drinking water. Till 1997, only six lakh families (6.25% of a total of 96 lakh rural families) had toilet facilities. Although the coverage of sanitation has somewhat increased since then, it is still very unsatisfactory.

Over 87% of the state's borrowings were financing consumption expenditure, adding to the unsustainability of the debt contracted by successive governments. The state is simply unable to cope with high levels of debt and deficits.

Public investment in agriculture is near zero. The contribution of agriculture to the state's GDP has been sharply declining (this, of course, is a nationwide trend), but even the contribution of industries has been near stagnant.

Maharashtra's share in India's foodgrain production has declined from 7.3% in 1980 to less than 6% twenty years later. The area under food crops has shrunk sharply. Land degradation has become a major problem in the state, reducing the natural fertility of the soil.

The state's per-hectare yield of many crops is abysmally low compared to some other Indian states. The output of foodgrains per hectare in Maharashtra is ten times less than in Punjab! A cotton farmer in Maharashtra harvests only 134 kgs/ha compared to 360 kgs in Haryana.

The state was once a leader in sugar industry. Many of its sugar cooperatives are now in a mess. A sugarcane grower in Maharashtra produces 880 quintals/ha compared to 1770 quintals in Tamil Nadu.

In spite of being a highly water-deficient state, nearly 50% of the available water is wasted due to misuse, overuse and leakage during various stages of the water supply system. Distribution of irrigation water is so skewed that "marginal farmers stand little or no chance to improve their access to irrigation and, through it, to food and nutrition."

Food security for the poorest among the poor is a moral obligation of any government. But, as the Planning Commission's report says, Maharashtra has not done well in nutritional needs of the poor. About 57% of the rural households and 55% urban households consume less than 2,700 calories per day. Nearly half the married women in the age group of 15-49 years suffer from anaemia. 16% of the children under 2 years are severely undernourished, the problem being more acute among the tribal population of the state.

Maharashtra's industrial development in big, medium and SSI sectors is severely hampered by the acute shortage of power. In 2004, the Congress-NCP coalition won a renewed mandate largely due to the tanatalising promise made, on the eve of the elections, that the government would supply free power to farmers. Once the coalition was back in power, the scheme was stopped in less than a year. Since then, not only is there no free power for farmers, but no power at all for most parts of the day. Loadshedding in the state ranges from 10 to 12 hours in rural areas and 2.5 to 6.30 hours in urban areas per day. Industries in the state have been disadvantaged while competing with the global marketplace as a result of the irregular power supply at a high cost.

Maharashtra is the second most urbanised state in India, after Tamil Nadu, in terms of the share of urban dwellers in the total overall population. Nevertheless, its total urban population (41 million) far exceeds that of Tamil Nadu (27 million). Sadly, the state's ability to deal with the challenges of urbanization is pathetic. More than 90% of the urban wastewater goes untreated, polluting water bodies in the nearby areas.

Nothing illustrates poor urban governance better than the multiple woes of Mumbai. Notwithstanding the construction of the iconic sea-link between Bandra and Worli, a project that suffered from huge time and cost overruns, Mumbai's infrastructure and basic civic needs remain badly neglected.

Since this brief snapshot of Maharashtra's development challenges is being presented in the backdrop of the upcoming Assembly elections that will give birth to a new government, it is relevant to look at what the Planning Commission's document says about the quality of governance in the state so far. For many state governments in the past few decades, 'Good Governance' has been anything but the guiding principle. "Myopic vision", "reluctance to undertake long-term planning" are some of the mild remarks to be found in the Planning Commission's report. A stronger indictment comes from the Maharashtra Government's own Administrative Reforms Committee Report (2002). It has highlighted the fact that the "public perception of the government is characterised by Four D's ― Discourtesy, Delay, Dishonesty and Deficiency. These Four D's have affected its capacity for effective governance."

Will the new Vidhan Sabha and the new government make any difference to this worrisome record of development and governance?

(The writer is a social activist and an independent commentator. Comments are welcome at: sudheenkulkarni@gmail.com)