Followers

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

We are challenging our evolution

We have just entered the era of designer babies with China’s first gene-edited baby. The question is whether they can use this newfound superpower in a responsible way that will benefit the planet and its people.

A Chinese scientist from a university in Shenzhen claims he has succeeded in creating the world’s first genetically edited babies. He told the Associated Press that twin girls were born earlier this month after he edited their embryos using CRISPR technology to remove the CCR5 gene, which plays a critical role in enabling many forms of the HIV virus to infect cells.
We have just entered the era of designer babies. We will soon have the ability to edit embryos with the aim of eliminating debilitating disease, selecting physical traits such as skin and eye colour, or even adding extra intelligence. But our understanding of the effects of the technology is in its infancy.
The technology is CRISPR: clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats. Discovered by scientists only a few years ago, CRISPRs are elements of an ancient system that protects bacteria and other single-celled organisms from viruses, acquiring immunity to them by incorporating genetic elements from the virus invaders. CRISPRs evolved over millions of years to trim pieces of genetic information from one genome and insert it into another. And this bacterial antiviral defence serves as an astonishingly cheap, simple, elegant way to quickly edit the DNA of any organism in the lab.
Until recently, experimenting with DNA required sophisticated labs, years of experience, and millions of dollars. The use of CRISPRs has changed all that. CRISPRs work by using an enzyme — Cas9 — that homes in on a specified location in a strand of DNA. The process then edits the DNA to either remove unwanted sequences or insert payload sequences. CRISPRs use an RNA molecule as a guide to the DNA target. To set up a CRISPR editing capability, a lab only needs to order an RNA fragment and purchase off-the-shelf chemicals and enzymes— costing only a few dollars.
Because CRISPR is cheap and easy to use, it has both revolutionised and democratised genetic research. Thousands of labs all over the world are experimenting with CRISPR-based editing projects. China has taken the lead, largely because it lacks the regulations and moral constraints that other countries abide by.
In 2014, Chinese scientists announced that they had successfully produced monkeys that had been genetically modified at the embryonic stage. In April 2015, another group of researchers in China published a paper detailing the first ever effort to edit the genes of a human embryo. The attempt failed, but it shocked the world: this wasn’t supposed to happen so soon. And then, in April 2016, yet another group of Chinese researchers reported that it had succeeded in modifying the genome of a human embryo in an effort to make it resistant to HIV infection.
This transgressed a serious boundary. We know too little to predict the broader effects of altering or disabling a gene. In the 1960s, we imagined rather naïvely that as time went by, we would understand with increasing precision the role of each gene in making us what we are. The foundation of genetics for decades, once biology’s Central Dogma, was the hypothesis that each gene codes for a single protein. Knowing the correspondences, we would have tools useful not only for research but also for curing and preventing disease with a genetic basis and perhaps for augmenting human evolution.
The one-gene-one-protein Central Dogma, though it continues to pervade our common beliefs about genetics, underwent conversion when scientists realised that many proteins comprise several polypeptides, each of which was coded for by a gene. The Dogma therefore became one gene, one polypeptide. But what sounded the entire Dogma’s death knell was the discovery in the early 1970s that a single gene can code for more than one protein. The discovery that the human genome contains only about 30,000 genes to code for some 90,000 proteins brought that home; but what makes our understanding appear spectacularly inadequate is the discovery in 2000 that a single gene can potentially code for tens of thousands of proteins.
In a nutshell, we don’t know the limits of the new technologies, can’t guess what lifetime effects a single gene alteration will have on a single individual, and have no idea at all what effects alteration of genes in sperm or ova or a foetus will have on future generations. For these reasons, we have no knowledge of whether a particular modification of the human germline will be ultimately catastrophic, and no basis for considering that tampering with heritable genes can be humane or ethical.
Because of technologies such as obstetric ultrasonography, India already has a gender imbalance: for every 107 males there are 100 females. Given the disposition of parents to favour males, preference for fairer skins and higher intelligence, and even extra height and strength, there will soon be competition to create perfect children with these technologies. Except we don’t know what perfection is; intelligence and physical traits aren’t what make humans what they are, the greatest people are usually the most imperfect.
The reality is that we have arrived at a Rubicon. Humans are on the verge of finally being able to modify their own evolution. The question is whether they can use this newfound superpower in a responsible way that will benefit the planet and its people.
Vivek Wadhwa is a distinguished fellow at Carnegie Mellon University at Silicon Valley and author of Driver in the Driverless Car, how our technology choices will create the future
Source: Hindustan Times, 27/11/2018

Why Sit in Judgement?


An able king, husband and father, sent his wife to meet his brother, a rishi who lived in the forest, along with an elaborate meal. How would she cross the river? The king said, “At the river, fold your hands and say, if my husband, the king, has lived the life of a brahmachari since birth, then let this river part and make way for us.” The puzzled queen did so with utter faith and the river parted. The rishi greeted the queen and her entourage and relished the meal she got for him. The rishi blessed his sister-in-law. The queen asked the rishi how she could cross the river to return home. The sage replied, “Say, if my brother-in-law, the rishi, has maintained a perfect fast since he became a recluse, then, O river, let me pass.” Again the queen did as she was told, the river parted and they reached home. The queen then asked a minister: why was she told to say things different from the lives the two men were leading? The king was not a brahmachari and the sage was not fasting. Yet, the river parted! The minister replied, “Your majesty, never take appearances to be reality. The king has always yearned to be a recluse like his brother but had to remain king to honour his father’s wishes. The rishi did not need to eat but he did so to honour your efforts and his brother’s desire to feed him. So, neither brother was involved in their actions; they did it for nishkamya (detached, dutiful action done with equanimity) — hence, they were not bound by their actions.

Source: Economic Times, 28/11/2018

India had fastest wage growth in south Asia in 2017


Globally, the rate of growth in wages in 2017 fell to its lowest level since 2008, but workers in India had the highest average real wage growth in Southern Asia of 5.5% over the period 2008-17. At the same time, India and Pakistan had the dubious distinction of having the highest gap between what men earn and what women do. The mean gender pay gap of 34.5% for India and 34% for Pakistan on the basis of hourly wages were the worst among 73 countries for which data was available. Globally, women continue to be paid about 20% less than men. Not surprisingly, the gender gap in wages was lowest in high income countries and highest in low and middle income countries. These were among the findings of the Global Wage Report 2018 brought out by the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Globally, growth in wages in real terms (that is, adjusted for price inflation) declined from 2.4% in 2016 to just 1.8% last year, far below the level of 3.4% before the global financial crisis. If China with its huge population and rapid wage growth were excluded, the global real wage growth would be just 1.8% in 2016 and 1.1% in 2017. The slowdown in wage growth in 2017 occurred in spite of more rapid economic growth. Workers in Asia and the Pacific have enjoyed the highest real wage growth among all regions over the period 2006–17 with countries such as China, India, Thailand and Vietnam leading the way. However, even here, wage growth in 2017 was lower than in 2016, falling from 4.8% in 2016 to 3.5% in 2017. Again, if China were removed, the growth would be even lower. Over a longer period, 1999 to 2017, real wages have almost tripled in the emerging and developing countries of the G20, while in advanced G20 countries they have increased by just 9%. Yet, in many lowand middle-income countries, average wages remain low and insufficient to adequately cover the needs of workers and their families, pointed out the report. According to the report, gender pay gap is wider at the high end of the pay scale in high-income countries, while in low- and middle-income countries the gender pay gap is wider amongst the lower paid workers. The report also shows that traditional explanations, such as differences in the levels of education between men and women workers, play a limited role in explaining gender pay gaps. “In many countries women are more highly educated than men but earn lower wages, even when they work in the same occupational categories,” said Rosalia Vazquez-Alvarez, econometrician and wage specialist at the ILO and one of the authors of the report. “The wages of both men and women also tend to be lower in occupations with a predominantly female workforce. To reduce pay gaps, more emphasis needs to be placed on ensuring equal pay for women and men, and on addressing the undervaluation of women’s work,” she said

Source: Times of India, 28/11/2018

Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Economic & Political Weekly: Table of Contents


Vol. 53, Issue No. 46, 24 Nov, 2018

What is scully effect in sociology?

This refers to a social phenomenon wherein movie characters can surprisingly inspire behavioural changes in people in the real world. It is named after Dana Scully, a woman character in the American television series The X-Files which was aired mostly in the 1990s. Studies have found that the character, portrayed as a medical doctor and a special agent successfully working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, inspired many women who watched the series to take up education and careers in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics and with various law enforcement agencies.

Source: The Hindu, 27/11/2018

Margins of New India

Adivasis in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh are doing poorly, economically and educationally.

Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are among the four Indian states — other than those in the Northeast — with more than 20 per cent Adivasi population. Chhattisgarh, in fact, has an Adivasi population of more than 30 per cent. However, the Scheduled Tribes (STs) have hardly found a mention in the election campaigns in the two states. Along with the Muslims, the Adivasis seem to be the main losers in “New India”.
In both states — where the BJP has held office for a long time — the Adivasis lag behind other social groups and are losing ground, economically and educationally. According to the India Human Development Survey, in 2011-12, the annual per capita income of the STs in Chhattisgarh represented 51 per cent of the per capita income of the non-STs, a significant climbdown from 2004-2005, when this proportion was 68 per cent. In Madhya Pradesh, this proportion has fallen from 65 to 55 per cent. The Adivasis are worse-off in only one other state, Gujarat — also BJP-ruled. In Gujarat, STs’ annual per capita income represents only 35 per cent of the annual per capita income of the others. In all three states, STs are poorer than SCs — in Gujarat, their per capita income is 45 per cent of that of SCs, in Chhattisgarh, 58 per cent, and in MP, it’s the highest among the three states, at 75 per cent.
The appalling socio-economic condition of the Adivasis is a reflection of their lack of education. Only 1.7 per cent of STs in the two states are graduates. The data suggests that quotas are not being filled in the university system as well as in the public sector. The economic situation of the Adivasis is, in fact, closely related to their under-representation among salaried people. In Chhattisgarh, only 6.2 per cent of Adivasis are salaried. In MP, only 3.5 per cent were salaried in 2011-12, compared to 4.9 per cent in 2004-05. In Chhattisgarh, 34 per cent of Adivasis are “labourers”, which means that they till the land of others. In MP, 46 per cent of them are “labourers”.
The fortunes of the STs in Chhattisgarh and MP — as well as in Gujarat — stands in stark contrast to their condition in South India. This is not because these states are richer, but because they are more egalitarian. In Karnataka, in 2011-12, the annual per capita income of STs represents 80 per cent of the annual per capita income of the other groups, up from 62 per cent in 2004-05. In undivided Andhra Pradesh, it has jumped from 76 per cent to 86 per cent in the same period. In both states, the annual per capita income of STs is either equivalent to (Andhra) or more (Karnataka) than that of SCs, and even of Muslims. This has something to do with education — the percentage of graduates among the Adivasis is 2.6 per cent in Andhra and 3.4 per cent in Karnataka (a proportion equal to that of SCs and superior to that of Muslims).
Their poor socio-economic condition notwithstanding, Adivasis voted for the BJP in the last three elections to the MP assembly. The party cornered 90 per cent of the Adivasi seats in 2003, 60 per cent in 2008 and 66 per cent of the seats in 2013. But the BJP gave three ministerial posts to Adivasis in 2003, two in 2008 and in 2013, three Adivasis held ministerial positions in MP: A group which constitutes more than 20 per cent of the state’s population has only a 12.5 per cent representation in the ministry.
Chhattisgarh is no different. The STs were offered only two ministerial positions in 2013, they held five positions in 2008 and eight in 2003. This could signal the growing distance between the BJP and Adivasis in the state. In the first election after the formation of the state, in 2003, 25 out of 34 ST seats were cornered by the BJP. This figure fell to 20 of 32 in 2008 and further to 11 out of 31 in 2013 — the Congress got 20 that year. This year, the BJP could benefit if the Mayawati-Ajit Jogi combine cuts into the Congress’s Adivasi vote.
In both states, the Forest Rights Act (FRA), that provides legal rights to Adivasis over their forestlands, has not been fully implemented. More than 40 per cent of them operate “marginal holdings” and their holdings are shrinking, according to the Agriculture Census. MP hasthe largest forest cover in the country, but Adivasis here have found it very difficult to obtain land titles. More than 60 per cent of the forest rights’ claims in the state have been dismissed. Wthe FRA allows for a maximum claim of four hectares (ha), the average size of the land distributed under the act in the state is about 1.45 ha. Chhattisgarh, Adivasis have filed 8,56,150 claims over land since 2006, of which 4, 57,969 (53 per cent) have been rejected. The average land distributed is a mere 0.85 hectare, while the Adivasis are entitled to 4 ha. In a contravention of the spirit of the FRA, Section 165 of the Chhattisgarh Land Code Act has been amended to facilitate the acquisition of tribal land by the government.
According to the Statistical Profile of STs in India (2013), 15 per cent of the Adivasis in the country live in MP. But more than 20 per of the crimes against STs are committed in the state, according to the Crime Bureau — including 40 per cent of the murders. In terms of literacy rate, the gap between the Adivasis and non-Adivasis is about 19 percentage points in MP — at the all-India level, this gap is about 14 per cent.
Why does the BJP get re-elected in Adivasis strongholds in MP despite the decline of the community during the party’s tenure in office? First, because STs are not in a majority in most of the reserved seats. Second, as Tariq Thachil points out in Elite parties, poor voters,the Sangh Parivar’s social work — free healthcare services, for instance — does have some impact. Third, the strategy of polarisation and Hinduisation works among STs. Fourth, the Adivasis are not a block: Like the SCs, they are divided into hundreds of subgroups, whose leaders can be co-opted. The current elections will show whether these factors still operate.
Source: Indian Express, 27/11/2018

To fix the unemployment problem, India must strengthen the manufacturing sector

Efforts to reduce the trade deficits must correct the imbalance between domestic absorption and domestic production; and manufacturing-led growth can ensure this

The Labour Bureau’s last household survey (2015-16) reports India’s unemployment rate at 3.6% (by the Usual Principal Subsidiary Status definition), a figure lower than that of several advanced economies. So why are jobs such a hot button issue?
Dig a bit deeper and startling facts emerge. An examination of unemployment rates (UR) across different age groups shows that UR for the youth (age group 15-29 years) stood at 10.3%, considerably higher than that for the older job seekers (30-59 years) at 1%. Additionally, detailed analysis of the UR across different educational categories shows that the UR increases with educational qualifications. The UR for those with graduate and post graduate (and above) degrees was significantly high at 13.7% and 12.5% respectively. In contrast, the UR for those who are not literate and are literate below primary level was less than 1% in 2015-16.
A further disaggregated analysis of UR by age and educational qualification shows that UR for youth with graduate degrees and postgraduate and above degrees was close to 30%. These statistics reflect that India’s youth, and the educated ones in particular, face a serious employment crisis — a predicament that is only likely to exacerbate as the young population gets more educated. India’s educated aspirational youth are seeking well paying productive jobs commensurate with their educational qualifications. So where will these productive jobs come from?
India’s inability to create productive jobs for its rapidly rising young workforce stems largely from the failure of its manufacturing sector to become an engine of job creation. Unlike other countries at similar levels of development, India has achieved spectacular growth rates without witnessing growth of its manufacturing sector. The share of manufacturing in GDP and employment has remained virtually stagnant at 15% and 12% respectively over the past three decades. The rapid service-led growth experience over the last decade has lent credence to the belief that not only has India leapfrogged the phase of manufacturing-led development and set out its own idiosyncratic path of structural transformation, but also that the idea of manufacturing-led growth is obsolete . This could not be further from the truth.
Manufacturing generates the strongest forward and backward linkages across other sectors of the economy, which are important transmission links to growth and job creation. With a strong multiplier effect, manufacturing has the potential to generate faster growth of employment in the organised sector than the services sector. Apart from generating direct employment, rapid manufacturing growth drives rapid growth of employment in other sectors too, as the production processes in manufacturing increase the demand for raw materials, energy, construction and services from a broad array of supplying industries. Additionally, manufacturing activity raises growth of non traded services through the income effect.
The India Employment Report (2016) identifies another compelling reason for making a transition from service-led growth to manufacturing-led growth. Services-led growth has created a large imbalance between domestic absorption (requiring mainly goods) and domestic production (of mainly services) that has led to unsustainably large trade deficits. Services exports simply cannot finance the required goods imports. A country cannot trade services for most of its goods. Efforts to reduce the trade deficits must correct this imbalance between domestic absorption and domestic production; and manufacturing-led growth can ensure this. As India’s trade and current account deficit widens, this issue becomes more pertinent than ever before.
There are many who argue that India has missed the manufacturing bus and that automation and robotics will spell the end of manufacturing jobs. While it is true that workers are likely to be displaced by technological changes, it is also true that several new tasks and occupations will emerge, thereby creating a reinstatement effect. Importantly, in developing countries such as India, where labour costs are still relatively low and there are significant financial costs associated with adopting and implementing new technologies, the pace of automation is likely to be slower than in the advanced world. Therefore, even though it may be technically feasible to automate, it may not be economically feasible. This gives India a longer window of opportunity to adapt and prepare for technological changes and build a strong robust manufacturing sector. Ignoring the potential of this sector in addressing India’s employment and macroeconomic challenges would be a monumental mistake.
Radhicka Kapoor is a fellow at ICRIER, and has worked with the Planning Commission and International Labour Organization
Source: Hindustan Times, 27/11/2018