Advancing Disease Elimination: Strategies and Challenges

Progress in

Disease Eradication


The Carter Center heralds the near eradication of guinea worm disease, marking a significant milestone in global health efforts. This underscores the importance of disease elimination as a precursor to eradication, aligning with the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Distinguishing Elimination from Eradication:

Elimination targets zero transmission within defined regions, whereas eradication signifies permanent cessation of infection. Disease elimination serves as a crucial public health strategy, galvanizing health systems and garnering political commitment and community support.

Challenges and Considerations:

Elimination efforts are resource-intensive and may strain weak health systems if not carefully planned. Thus, prioritization of diseases for elimination should consider prevalence, feasibility, and impact on the population.

Surveillance and Preparedness:

Successful elimination requires robust surveillance systems, laboratory strengthening, and workforce training. Continued surveillance post-elimination is vital to detect reintroduction of pathogens.

Regional Approach to Elimination:

Given the diverse disease burden across regions, a phased and localized approach to elimination is recommended. This involves targeting specific diseases in defined geographical areas, facilitating easier resource allocation and management.

Multisectoral Collaboration:

Regional implementation allows for multisectoral collaboration, innovation, and adoption of locally effective solutions. Regional elimination efforts should be supported by national and state governments, with careful monitoring of progress.

National Scale-up of Elimination:

Regional elimination efforts can be scaled up nationally, with the Union government coordinating efforts and managing cross-state disease spread. India’s phased approach to elimination can ensure effective national eradication efforts.


Disease elimination serves as a critical step towards global health security, with regional strategies providing a pathway to national eradication efforts, ultimately contributing to improved public health outcomes.


Understanding Income Inequality in India

Historical Perspective:

Income distribution in India has undergone significant shifts over the decades. In 2022, the top 1% of Indians garnered 22.6% of the national income, marking a stark contrast from their share of 11.5% in 1951 and 6% in the 1980s.

Rising Disparity:

The top 10% of Indians saw their share of national income rise from 36.7% in 1951 to 57.7% in 2022. Conversely, the bottom 50% witnessed a decline in their share from 20.6% in 1951 to 15% in 2022.

Acceleration of Inequality:

The income gap has widened notably in the last two decades. In 2022, the top 1% held a historic peak share of national income, surpassing levels observed in developed nations like the United States and the United Kingdom.

Magnitude of Disparity:

Close to one crore adults belonged to the top 1% income bracket, earning 23 times more on average than the average Indian, who earned ₹2.3 lakh annually.

Post-Liberalization Dynamics:

Post-liberalization in the 1990s, income disparity escalated rapidly. While the income share of the top 1% surged, the shares of the bottom 50% and middle 40% steadily declined.

Comparative Analysis:

India’s top 1% income share in 2022 exceeded levels observed during colonial rule and surpassed that of advanced economies like the U.S., China, France, the U.K., and Brazil.

Growth Disparity:

Although India’s income levels did not surge as rapidly as other comparable economies like China and Vietnam, the top 1% income share remained disproportionately high.

Implications and Concerns:

The widening income gap poses challenges to equitable growth and social cohesion. Addressing income inequality requires comprehensive policies focused on redistributive measures and inclusive economic development.

Key Points from HSBC’s Report on India’s Economic Growth Drivers

Private Real Estate Leading Investment Upturn:

India’s investment upswing is primarily fueled by private real estate expenditures rather than public capital expenditure. This challenges the prevailing narrative about the economy’s growth drivers.

Consumption Growth Revision Expected:

Despite weak consumption growth, there are indications that it may be revised upwards in forthcoming official GDP figures. Factors such as rising consumer goods imports, personal services, and non-housing personal loans suggest stronger consumption than initially estimated.

Unequal Consumption Growth:

Consumption growth in India is not uniform, with higher-income households experiencing faster spending increases compared to lower-income households. However, even consumer staples exhibit weakness, indicating a broad-based revival in private investments is yet to materialize.

Need for Confidence Boost:

Higher consumption levels are crucial to instill confidence and stimulate investment. The narrative of robust GDP driven by public investment and a shift towards private sector investment instead of consumption is questioned, emphasizing the importance of consumer spending in driving economic growth.

Public Investment Challenges:

Despite increased government capital expenditure, public sector firms are scaling back investments, resulting in an overall public investment ratio below pre-pandemic levels. Private investment, particularly in dwellings and structures like housing, has seen a notable increase, aligning with trends in house sales and housing loan growth.

Key Points from the Analysis of the Electoral Bond Scheme (EBS)

Objective and Genesis:

The EBS was introduced with the objective of addressing issues related to political funding transparency and eliminating black money from electoral financing. It aimed to provide a clean channel for funds to flow from donors to political parties.

Challenges and Concerns:

Despite its intentions, the EBS has faced criticism and scrutiny due to various shortcomings. One major concern is the lack of transparency and accountability in the scheme, particularly regarding the anonymity of donors and the confidentiality clause.

Confidentiality Clause:

The confidentiality clause in the EBS prohibits banks from disclosing information about bond purchasers except under specific circumstances, such as a court order or a criminal investigation. This raises questions about the effectiveness of enforcement and accountability.

Enforcement Challenges:

The limited information available to enforcement agencies under the EBS makes it difficult to establish links between donors and political parties. This undermines efforts to investigate allegations of corruption or quid pro quo.

Implications and Criticisms:

The EBS has faced criticism for creating a system that perpetuates opacity and uneven playing fields among political parties. It has also raised concerns about potential misuse and abuse of the scheme for illicit purposes.

Parliamentary Role:

The responsibility for addressing the shortcomings of the EBS lies with Parliament, which has the mandate to enact laws and policies. A consultative process involving all stakeholders is necessary to find a viable solution to the challenges posed by political funding transparency.

Public Expectations:

The public expects political parties to uphold principles of probity and transparency in their funding sources. There is a growing demand for cleaner and more accountable practices in political financing to restore trust and credibility in the democratic process.