ECONOMIC INEQUALITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN INDIAN STATES: A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS (2018–2023)

Authors

  • Sarah Razack Government First Grade College and PG Center, Haveri https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7279-656X
  • Anitha C V Government First Grade College, Harohalli

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59415/mjacs.306

Keywords:

Economic inequality, SDG Index, Indian states, panel data, inclusive development, NITI Aayog

Abstract

India’s rapid economic growth over the past decade has coincided with persistent inequality and uneven progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While national level assessments offer important insights, they often mask sharp sub national disparities in income, human development, and social investment. This study examines the dynamic relationship between inequality and SDG performance across 30 states and Union Territories of India during 2018–2023. Using a balanced panel dataset, the SDG Index score published by NITI Aayog is modelled as a function of the Gini Coefficient, Per-Capita Net State Domestic Product (NSDP), Literacy Rate, Unemployment Rate, Infant Mortality Rate (IMR), and Per-Capita Social Sector Expenditure. Panel econometric methods are employed, including pooled OLS, fixed-effects (FE) with state and year dummies, and random effects (RE) models, with robust standard errors clustered at the state level. Diagnostic tests and robustness checks (with lagged regressors) are also performed to ensure reliability.

The results reveal three major findings. First, contrary to expectations, inequality (Gini) does not show a significant negative effect on SDG outcomes in FE or RE models, suggesting that short-run state level changes in inequality do not strongly determine SDG performance.        Second, per-capita NSDP emerges as the most consistent positive predictor, particularly in the RE specification, underscoring the central role of economic scale in driving development outcomes. Third, literacy, unemployment, IMR, and social expenditure exhibit expected signs in some models but are generally not statistically significant, indicating that their effects are either indirect or operate over longer horizons. The study concludes that growth remains a strong driver of SDG outcomes, but inequality reduction and social investments may require deeper structural and institutional reforms to show measurable impact. These findings have clear policy implications for aligning India’s growth strategies with the equity and inclusiveness agenda of SDG 10.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Sarah Razack, Government First Grade College and PG Center, Haveri

Assistant Professor of Economics, Department of Economics (PG), Government First Grade College and PG Center, Haveri.

Anitha C V, Government First Grade College, Harohalli

Assistant Professor of Economics, Government First Grade College, Harohalli

References

Atkinson, A. B. (2015). Inequality: What can be done? Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674287013

Balasubramanian, S., Kumar, R., &Loungani, P. (2021). Inequality and locational determinants of the distribution of living standards in India (IMF Working Paper No. 2021/050). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513570662.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781513570662.001

Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis. University of Chicago Press.

Dhingra, S. (2022). Unemployment and labour market recovery policies in India. IZA Journal of Labor Policy, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/izajolp-2022-0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41775-022-00136-x

Government of India, Press Information Bureau. (2025, February 25). Economic Survey 2024–25: Social sector—Extending reach and driving outcomes [Press release]. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2012054

International Monetary Fund. (2017). India: Selected issues (IMF Country Report No. 17/54). https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2017/02/20/India-Selected-Issues-44680 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5089/9781475570625.002

Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.

Mohanty, R., & Behera, R. (2023). Public health expenditure and outcomes in India. Journal of Public Health Research, 12(3), Article jphr.2023.3119. https://doi.org/10.1177/22799036231192074

NITI Aayog. (2024). SDG India Index 2023–24. Government of India. https://sdgindiaindex.niti.gov.in/

United Nations. (n.d.). Goal 10: Reduced inequalities. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved October 26, 2024, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/inequality/

Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). MIT Press.

World Inequality Lab. (2024). Income and wealth inequality in India, 1922–2023: The rise of the billionaire raj (World Inequality Lab Working Paper No. 2024/09). Paris School of Economics. https://wid.world/document/income-and-wealth-inequality-in-india-1922-2023-the-rise-of-the-billionaire-raj-world-inequality-lab-working-paper-2024-09/

Downloads

Published

2026-01-10

How to Cite

Sarah Razack, & Anitha C V. (2026). ECONOMIC INEQUALITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN INDIAN STATES: A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS (2018–2023). MLAC Journal for Arts, Commerce and Sciences (m-JACS) ISSN: 2584-1920, 4(5), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.59415/mjacs.306

ARK