Tathya.in, Feb 26, 2007
Bhubaneswar:25/February/2007
As India lives in its villages, setting up Indian Institute of Public Health (IIPH) across urban areas is the biggest weakness of the National Policy on Public Health System (NPPHS).
Vigilant Non Resident Oriya (NRO) Digamber Patra, while analyzing the NPPHS, called upon the Union government to establish centers of IIPH in rural, remote and backward pockets geographically situated across India.
Dr.Patra, Visiting Lecturer, Waseda University, Tokyo has suggested that places like Kalahandi (Orissa) in South-East India, Dibrugarh (Assam) in North-East India, Bellary (Karnataka) in South-West India and Churu (Rajasthan) in North-West India needs these types of centers.
How ever the urban region like Lucknow (Chandigarh or Shimla or Delhi) in Northern Zone, Thiruvantapuram (Chennai or Hyderabad or Bangalore) in Southern Zone, Bhubaneswar (Patna or Kolkata) in Eastern Zone and Ahmedabad (Bhopal or Jaipur or Mumbai) in Western Zone will be right places for IIPH.
In May 2006, the prime minister of India announced Pubic Health Foundation of India (PHFI) by replicating a similar system in the United States of America (USA).
However, before strengthening the NPPHS, the organization itself seems to be formulating its own weakness when it plans to establish few Indian Institute of Public Health (IIPH) across India in urban cities like Delhi, Kolkata, Ahemadabad, Hyderabad, Chennai, Chandigarh and Lucknow.
Pointing out the weakness he raises doubts over how the policy makers would formulate policy for the major part of rural India.
One needs to bear in mind that in “Shining India” visiting Kalahandi from Kolkata or Hyderabad might take two days where as from Delhi one could reach Kolkata/Hyderabad in 2 hours.
The current public health problems faced by rural and urban India is totally different and needs separate treatment, he suggested.
It is surprising that how it would help these proposed IIPH institutes located in various cities such as Kolkata to understand the basic health problem faced by rural Indian such as people in remote places like multi-facet backward Kalahandi.
On the other hand Orissa is among the least invested states in educational institute by Government of India.
Earlier shifting of a proposed NIS from Bhubaneswar to Kolkata had made a huge public protest in Orissa and for it the prime minister had to interfere by asking Department of Atomic Energy to establish a similar institute e.g. NISER at Bhubaneswar.
Despite that very recently an announced IIT in Orissa was abolished and shifted.
In eastern zone of the country, most of the central government’s educational institutes were/are being established only in Kolkata i.e. West Bengal state totally discounting requirement of other states like Orissa and Bihar, who are at the bottom of per capital expenditure in higher education.
This is also unlike other parts of India e.g. Southern, Northern and Western zones. For instance, Kolkata and its surrounding already have IIT, IIM, ISI, IISER, Indian Association of Cultivation Science (a science institute similar to IISc standard),
NITTR, Central University and there are proposals for new IIEST, NIPER, IIPH, etc in Kolkata. Where as none of the above institutes including proposed IIPH was/is being located in Orissa except a new IIT was recently announced in Bihar for eastern zone.
Both political and administrative apathy by decision makers is bringing this disparity in the eastern zone of the country, he alleged.
Locating permanently a separate IIPH in these pockets would be very much helpful to assess and understand the basic public health problems and for formulating new policies for rural region, Dr.Patra suggested.
No comments:
Post a Comment