Dr Mahbub ul Haq had a distinguished career as an academic administrator and advisor. He served as the World Bank’s Director of Policy Planning from 1970 to 1982. During his tenure he made a significant contribution to the World Bank’s approach to the philosophy and policy of development. Under his influence the Bank came to focus on people’s well-being rather than on economic indicators and consequently launched poverty alleviation programmes and made substantial allocations for social sectors such as education, nutrition and water supply.
Dr Haq joined the government of Pakistan in 1982 as Minister of Finance, Planning and Commerce and served in that capacity until 1988. As a minister he was instrumental in launching several initiatives for poverty alleviation and social spending and for the deregulation of the economy and tax reforms.
The issue of human development was the closest to Dr Haq’s heart from the beginning of his career. His close association with the United Nations Human Development Programme provided him an opportunity to give a concrete shape to his ideas on human development. He was Special Advisor to the UNDP from 1989 to 1985. His pioneering and enduring work at the UNDP was the production of the Human Development Report. As Project Director of the Human Development Report, Dr Haq gathered a team of distinguished economists, including Paul Streeten, Amartya Sen (who was his colleague at Trinity College, Cambridge and who won the Nobel Prize in 1998), Frances Steward and Richard Jolly, who were closely involved in the production of the Human Development Reports.
In 1996 Dr Haq left the UNDP to establish the Human Development Centre in Islamabad, Pakistan, a policy research institute devoted to carrying out research and policy studies in the field of human development, with a special focus on South Asia.
Dr Haq died on 16 July 1998 in New York, leaving behind his wife, Khadija Haq, and two children. After his death, the Human Development Centre at Islamabad was renamed as the Mahbub ul Haq Human Development Centre. In his honour, the UNDP instituted an Award for Outstanding Contribution to Human Development.
Dr Haq’s major works include Reflections on Human Development (1996), Humanising Global Institutions (1998), Human Development in South Asia (1997), New Imperatives of Human Security (1995) and A New Framework for Development Cooperation (1995).
GDP vs Human Development
Since the time the Scottish social philosopher and political economist Adam Smith laid the foundations of modern economics with his monumental work An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), the Western world has single-mindedly pursued the goal of economic growth and considered it the only key to human progress and prosperity. Smith’s ideas continue to dominate politics, economic planning, social policies and general outlook in large parts of the world. Smith’s ideas paved the way for the emergence of a distinctive perspective on man’s nature and behaviour, known as Homo economicus or Economic Man. The term Homo economicus was first used in the late 19th century in critical responses to John Stuart Mill’s treatise Principles of Political Economy (1848), and later elaborated by the Italian sociologist Vilfredo Pareto in the early part of the 20th century. The term Economic Man enshrines a model of man who acts rationally out of self-interest and a desire to maximise his happiness and well-being through material possessions. His actions, according to this model, are motivated purely by self-interest. Economic Man is essentially an amoral being, devoid of all social values and ethical norms, except when they serve his material interests.
A clear reflection of the model of Homo economicus is to be found in the notion of the Gross Domestic Product or GDP. Since its birth in the 1930s, the Gross Domestic Product or GDP has been widely adopted as a reliable measure of economic performance and progress around the world. The conventional view has been that growth in GDP is a reliable index of a country’s progress and development.
Since his student days at Cambridge, Dr Mahbub ul Haq had serious reservations about the GDP as a reliable index of people’s well-being. The Nobel laureate Professor Amartya Sen reminisces that one day in October 1953, when he was on his way to a lecture at Cambridge University, he ran into Mahbub ul Haq. The two young men soon became friends and the friendship lasted till the end of Dr Haq’s life. They often chatted in the evening and both shared the view that there was a silliness about identifying growth with development. A decade later, when Professor Sen visited Dr Haq at his home in Karachi, their conversation returned to the issue of the inadequacy of the GDP. Dr Haq told Professor Sen: “If India and Pakistan were to grow as fast as can possibly imagine, when you and I are 50, India’s and Pakistan’s per capita income will only be getting close to Egypt’s. Is that all we want?” Many years later, when Dr Haq asked Professor Sen to help him devise the Human Development Index, the latter recoiled at the idea. Sen recollects: “I told Mahbub that it’s vulgar to capture in one number an extremely complex story, just as GDP is vulgar”. Dr Haq called him back and said: “Amartya, you’re exactly right. What I want you to do is to produce an index as vulgar as GDP, but more relevant to our own lives”. Sen says he eventually came around to seeing the wisdom in Dr Haq’s pragmatism. He says the Human Development Index has been extremely useful for tracking the progress of the world’s poor nations. 1
Dr Haq’s ideas on the philosophical and pragmatic dimensions of human development took shape in the course of four decades from the 1960s to the 1990s. With the passage of time, Dr Haq became increasingly convinced about the futility of using the GDP as an exclusive, dependable measure of development. In May 1970, at a conference of the Society for International Development in Ottawa, Dr Haq declared: “It is time to stand development theory on its head, since a rising growth rate is no guarantee against worsening poverty”.
The paradigm of human development, as conceived and developed by Dr Haq and Professor Amartya Sen, seeks to go beyond such issues as economic growth (measured in statistical terms) and the rise and fall of national incomes. The discourse of human development focuses on creating an environment in which people can develop their full potential and lead productive, creative lives in accordance with their value preferences, needs and interests. The focus in the discourse on human development is on building human capabilities. The most basic capabilities are to lead long and healthy lives, to have access to resources needed for a decent standard of living, and to be able to participate in the life of the community. The notion of human development is closely intertwined with issues of human freedom and human rights.
Dr Haq maintained that the real objective of development is to enlarge people’s choices in all fields—economic, political and cultural. He emphasized that people are both the means and the end of development. To quote him:
Dr Haq outlined four salient features of the people-centred development paradigm.
The basic purpose of development is to enlarge people’s choices….
People often value achievements that do not show up at all, or not
immediately, in income or growth figures: greater access to knowledge,
better nutrition and health services, more secure livelihoods, security
against crime and physical violence, satisfying leisure hours, political
and cultural freedoms, and a sense of participation in community activities.
The objective of development is to create an enabling environment for
people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. 2
(i) Development must put people at the centre of its concerns.
(ii) The purpose of development is to enlarge all human choices, not just income.
(iii) The human development paradigm is concerned with both building human capabilities through investment in people and the full actualization of these capabilities.
(iv) Human development has four essential pillars: equity, sustainability, productivity and empowerment.
Dr Haq argued that though economic growth is essential for reducing or eliminating poverty, the quality of economic growth is just as important as its quantity. People must have equitable access to existing economic and political opportunities. Productivity requires investment in people and an enabling macro-economic environment for them to fulfill their potentialities. Empowerment means that people are in a position to exercise choices of their own free will. He emphasized that a human development strategy must involve community participation and self-reliance. 3
A pioneering and enduring contribution of Dr Haq was that he played a key role in shifting the focus of development discourse from GDP-centred economic growth to people and their well-being. He initiated a global movement involving eminent economists, planners, policy makers and activists for pushing a people-centred agenda of development. His legacy continues to reverberate in development thinking across the world and, more importantly, in the UNDP’s Human Development Reports.
Dr Haq introduced and revitalized several important ideas, including the idea of human security, the 20/20 concept, peace dividend, and development cooperation within South Asia. These ideas were widely discussed in the conferences organized by the United Nations in the 1990s.
Human security is defined as the material and moral foundation that secures lives, livelihoods and an acceptable quality of life for the majority of people. Human security is defined as “the liberation of human beings from those intense, extensive, prolonged and comprehensive threats to which their lives and freedom are vulnerable”. Human security is a fundamental prerequisite for human development and is regarded as the “rearguard of human development”. Human security enables people to contain or avert threats to their lives, livelihoods and personal autonomy and dignity. It is increasingly in the focus of academic and political attention in the rapidly changing global scenario. A whole set of factors, including environmental pollution, large population shifts, global financial downturn, civil wars, spreading poverty, high unemployment rates, political repression by authoritarian governments, global terrorism and ethnic and sectarian conflicts, have seriously undermined human security.
At Dr Haq’s urging, a global compact was reached at the World Social Summit in Copenhagen in March 1995 to the effect that the developing nations will earmark 20 per cent of their national budgets for the furtherance of five priority concerns: universal basic education, primary healthcare for all, safe drinking water, adequate nutrition for severely malnourished children, and family planning services for all willing couples. Likewise, the donor nations from amongst the industrially advanced countries will pledge to earmark at least 20 per cent of their aid budgets for the furtherance of these goals.
Dr Haq was highly critical of the rising costs of military expenditure, the futility of nuclear race and the lack of development cooperation among South Asian nations. He speculated that it would cost $34 billion dollars per year to build a world society where there would be adequate education, healthcare and nutrition for all people. This, he said, is less than a quarter of the $130 billion that the Third World countries spend on their military establishments. Similarly, he argued, the cost of a single military submarine was enough to provide safe drinking water to 600,000,000 people in the developing world, and the cost of a jet fighter could provide schooling to 3000,000 children in the developing world.
Dr Haq envisaged the formation of a federal economic unit in South Asia, along the lines of the European Union.
Human Development Reports
Dr Haq is the originator of the Human Development Index, one of the most influential and widely used indices to measure human development in a comparative, cross-national framework. Dr Haq defined the basic objectives and goals of human development in terms of enlarging people’s choices and enhancing their capabilities. Amartya Sen, who closely collaborated with Dr Haq in developing the Human Development Index, has said: “Human development as an approach is concerned with what I take to be the basic development idea: namely, advancing the richness of human life, rather than the richness of the economy in which human beings live, which is only a part of it”. The issues and themes considered most central to human development include greater access to knowledge, better nutrition and health services, reduction in inequalities, participation and freedom, human security and sustainability.
The Human Development Report was launched, under the auspices of the United Nations Development Programme, in 1990 with the overarching goal of putting people back at the centre of the development process in terms of economic debate, policy and advocacy. The Report’s basic aim was to look beyond economic growth and to focus on people’s long-term well-being.
The Human Development Index, which has been used by the United Nations Development Programme in its annual Human Development Reports since 1990, combines a nation’s GDP with two core factors, namely, education, based on adult literacy and school-enrollment data, and health, based on life expectancy statistics. Since the publication of the first Report, three new composite indices for human development have been added: the Gender-related Development Index, the Gender Empowerment Measure, and the Human Poverty Index.
Inspired by the Human Development Reports, over 600 regional and national human development reports at the country level have been published in more than 140 nations. Mention may be made, in particular, of the series on Arab Human Development Reports, published in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2009. The first Arab Human Development Report identified three major deficits in the Arab world: knowledge, freedom and women’s rights. The subsequent reports explored in greater depth the three deficits identified in the 2002 report. The Arab Human Development Report 2009 focused on human security in the context of the Arab world.
The Human Development Index, which turns 20 this year, has successfully challenged the hegemony of the growth-centric paradigm in economics and democratic planning and policy making. Since 1990, the Human Development Reports have provided insightful and innovative analyses of a wide range of issues and concerns, including gender, poverty, human mobility, climate change and globalization.
Human Development in South Asia
One of Dr Haq’s major achievements was the production of a comprehensive report, Human Development in South Asia, prepared by the Human Development Centre in close collaboration with the UNDP in 1997. The report presented a grim, alarming picture of the state of human development in the region and pointed out that South Asia is the poorest, the most illiterate, the most malnourished and the least gender-sensitive region in the world. The governments of South Asian countries have made very little investment in providing basic social services, especially education and healthcare, to improve the lives of their 1.2 billion people. 4
Human Development in South Asia revealed that one-half of the world’s illiterates and nearly 40 per cent of the world’s poor live in South Asia. Out of a total population of 1.2 billion, around 500 million people are in the category of the absolute poor, surviving on less than a dollar a day. Over one-fourth of the total population in the region does not have access to clean drinking water. Nearly half of the world’s malnourished children are in South Asia. About 85 million children in South Asia are out of school. An estimated 134 million children in the region spend long working hours in inhuman conditions. South Asia is the only region in the world where men outnumber women: 94 women to 100 men. The region has the lowest literacy rate (49%) in the world, lower than that of sub-Saharan Africa. Over 400 million illiterate adults, who comprise nearly half of the world’s illiterate people, are found in South Asia. The region’s female literacy rate is 36 per cent, compared to an average of 55 per cent in the developing world.
The report emphasizes that the real wealth of South Asia is its people. The basic objective of the report, Dr Haq pointed out, is to urge policy makers to take urgent steps to correct the gloomy situation. This requires, he stressed, a complete restructuring of development priorities. The report presents a blueprint for an investment in social services over a period of 15 years and estimates that such an investment would cost about $8.6 billion a year, or an additional 1.6 per cent combined GNP of South Asia. The report recommended that the SAARC countries should agree to reduce their defence expenditure and earmark the resources thus released for investment in urgent social priority needs.
Beyond Human Development: Emerging Paradigms
It is exactly two decades since the first Human Development Report was launched under the auspices of the United Nations. The 20th anniversary of the first Human Development Report calls for a critical appraisal of the project as well as of the idea of human development that has been the guiding force in the Reports, in the context of contemporary concerns and current thinking on the subject.
Three points in this connection are noteworthy. First, The enormous popularity of the Human Development Reports, including the annual global reports as well as the regional and national reports, testifies to the relevance, utility and wide recognition of the concept of human development as a viable alternative to the GDP-centred, growth-driven model of progress and development. Second, most if not all current ideas and emerging paradigms relating to the issues of development, progress and human well-being repudiate the neo-classical quantitative model of development. This vindicates Dr Haq’s conviction and vision. Alex Micholas, a former chancellor of the University of Northern British Columbia, says: “The economists messed everything up. The main barrier to getting progress has been that statistical agencies around the world are run by economists and statisticians. And they are not people who are comfortable with human beings. The fundamental national measure they employ tell us a good deal about the economy but almost nothing about the specific things in our lives that really matter”.
Until quite recently, development has been equated with an increase in GDP. The eminent economist and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out that development is meaningless in the long run unless it is sustainable, equitable and participatory. He emphasizes that it is not just income that matters but overall standards of living. In other words, development encompasses economic as well as social, cultural and environmental dimensions. The discourse on development cannot be divorced from issues such as social justice, equality, cultural diversity, environmental safeguards, universal access to health care and consumer protection. Stiglitz emphasizes that it is important for countries to focus on equity, on ensuring that the fruits of growth are widely shared. This is necessary if there is to be sustained growth. If economic growth is not shared throughout society, then development has failed. In Latin America, for example, while GDP went up by 25 percent from 1981 to 1993, the portion of the population living on under $2.15 a day increased from 26.9 percent to 29.5 percent. 5
One of the notable features of many developing countries is the paradoxical coexistence of rapid economic and technological development, on the one hand, and poverty and deprivation of large numbers of people and a pathetic state of human development, on the other. India, China, Kenya, Venezuela and the Arab region provide examples of lopsided development.
The critique of GDP as an overarching index of progress and development has steadily gathered momentum over the past few years. It has been pointed out that GDP does not take into account the benefits from nor the costs to the ecosystem. Furthermore, the critics argue, GDP does not adequately deal with issues such as the distribution of resources and social cohesion.
In November 2007, a high-level international conference on “Beyond GDP” was organized in Brussels under the auspices of the European Commission, European Parliament, Club of Rome, OECD and WWF. The conference aimed at clarifying the indices most appropriate to measure progress and well-being and how these indices could be integrated into policy making processes and public debates. The conference brought together 650 policy makers, experts and civil society representatives to address these central issues.
Third, there is a growing belief among economists, psychologists, philosophers, sociologists, planners and policy makers that the concept of human development, extremely valuable as it is, needs to be supplemented with other equally valuable parameters. This task has been facilitated by the availability of much better survey data, which allow for new types of economic and social measurement.
It is worthwhile to dwell on some of the highly important and promising ideas that are currently in the focus of academic attention. Princeton University’s Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize in 2002, tried to measure people’s subjective well-being by asking them about their mood at frequent intervals during a day. His data confirm that there is little correlation between income and happiness. On the contrary, people with higher incomes spend more time in activities that are associated with negative feelings, such as tension and stress. They are often in moods which they describe as hostile, angry, anxious and tense. He has showed that being wealthy is often a powerful predictor that people spend less time doing really pleasurable things and more time doing compulsory things and in passive leisure and feeling stressed.
Some eminent economists, including Amartya Sen, have suggested that individual well-being and happiness should be measured not just in terms of the conventional indicators such as national income and GDP and GNP but also in terms of what they call a Gross Wellbeing Index. Professor Robert A. Cummins of Deakin University, Australia has conducted studies measuring subjective well-being through a Personal Well-Being Index, which is based on seven questions on satisfaction.
Andrew Simms, the director of the New Economic Foundation, says, “Growth has failed on its own terms. You cannot have infinite growth in a world of finite resources. Redistribution of the existing wealth is a far better way to go. It is now a case of paradigm shift or bust”. The World Values Survey, an ongoing academic project at Tilburg University, the Netherlands, asks respondents to indicate how satisfied they are with their life as a whole. There is a World Database of Happiness in the Netherlands. Rotterdam’s Erasmus University has the World Database of Happiness.
Governments in several countries, including Australia, Canada, the UK, Bhutan and Thailand, have made well-being a national policy goal. Thailand has data on Gross National Happiness. In 1972 Bhutan’s King Jigme Wangchuk proposed the term Gross National Happiness as an alternative to gross national product. Under a new constitution adopted in 2008, government programmes from agriculture to transportation to foreign trade must be judged not by the economic benefits they may offer but by the happiness they produce. The four pillars of happiness, according to the Bhutanese government, are the economy, culture, environment and good governance.
The Canadian Index of Well-Being, coordinated by the Atkinson Foundation, was officially launched in the fall of 2005. It seeks to measure well-being in Canada across a wide spectrum of domains, including health, quality of environment, education and skills, vitality of community life, participation in the democratic process and leisure time. The New Economic Foundation introduced the Happy Planet Index in July 2006. The index is offered as an alternative to GDP and the Human Development Index, which are criticized for not taking sustainability into account.
In March 2008, the French President Nicolas Sarkozy appointed an international commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, under the chairmanship of the eminent economist and Nobel laureate Joseph E. Stiglitz. The commission included a team of internationally renowned economists, psychologists and other academics, including Amrtya Sen, the Princeton psychologist and Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman, the Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam and the Italian economist Jean-Paul Fitoussi. The commission grappled with the question whether GDP provides a reliable measure of living standards and collective well-being. The report of the commission, submitted in September 2009, noted that GDP may be a poor index of people’s well-being and that countries need to find ways to measure happiness and wellbeing alongside economic growth. The commission observed that if a few bankers get more riches, a country’s average income can go up, but most people’s incomes may experience a decline. In a society where inequalities are rising, GDP per capita statistics may not reflect what is happening to most citizens. The report noted that much of the world has long been ruled by an unhealthy fixation on swelling the gross domestic product, or the quantity of goods and services the economy produces. Stiglitz observed that much of the contemporary economic disaster owes to the misguided assumption that policy makers had to simply focus on nurturing growth, trusting that this would maximise prosperity and well-being for all.
Stiglitz explained the alternative to the growth-centric economic model through the metaphor of an automobile. “Suppose you are driving. You would like to know how the vehicle is functioning, but when you check the dashboard there is only one gauge. (It’s a peculiar car.) That single dial conveys one piece of important information: how fast you are moving. It’s not a bad comparison to the current GDP, but it doesn’t tell you many other things: How much fuel do you have left? How far can you go? How many miles have you gone already? So what you want is a car, or a country, with a big dashboard—but not so big that you can’t take in all of its information”. 6
Stiglitz and his fellow academics at the commission believe that assessing a country’s quality of life will have to take into account at least eight indicators: health, education, environmental sustainability, employment, material well-being, inter-personal connectedness and political engagement, and equitable distribution of material wealth and other social goods”. The commission’s 300-page report provides guidelines for creating a broader set of indicators that more accurately capture people’s wellbeing as well as sustainability. Over the past few months, the recommendations of the Stiglitz Commission have been taken up by the European Union’s statistical office as well as by the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
By their very nature, human beings draw an enormous amount of psychological and moral sustenance from close and enduring relationships in the family, neighbourhood and community. Social support and stable and warm relationships act as a vital anchorage in the face of loneliness, stress and depression and have a positive bearing on health. Professor Robert E. Lane, a political scientist at Yale University, says in his book The Loss of Happiness in Market Democracies that “overall evidence shows that companionship contributes more to well-being than does income”.
In a study of men and women between 50 and 68 years, carried out at the University of Chicago and reported in the journal Psychology and Aging in 2007, it was found that those who scored highest on measures of loneliness also had higher blood pressure, a major risk factor for heart disease. The study found that lonely people had as much as 30 points higher blood pressure readings than non-lonely people. The morbid health effects of loneliness accumulate gradually and faster as one gets older. The study also found that lonely people who were middle-aged and older also tended to have problems with alcoholism, depression, weak immune system, impaired sleep and suicide.
Several studies in recent years have suggested that social isolation and loneliness are often linked to dementia. A recent study of more than 800 elderly patients in the US, who were followed over a four-year period, has suggested that people who lead lonely lives are twice as likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease. The leader of the study, Professor Robert Wilson, Professor of Neuropsychology at Rush University Medical Centre in the US, points out that loneliness may affect systems in the brain dealing with cognition and memory, making lonely people more vulnerable to the effects of age-related decline in neural pathways. Professor Wilson adds that we need to be aware that loneliness has not only an emotional impact on old people but also a physical impact.
Harvard University’s Professor Robert Putnam emphasizes the value of what he calls “social capital”—which connotes social connectedness and solidarity—in human life. He says that losing a job can have repercussions for many years afterward. Referring to the current economic meltdown that engulfed the US and many European countries, Putnam says that the “damage to the country’s social fabric from this economic crisis must have been huge. And yet, we have plenty of numbers about the economic consequences but none of the numbers about the social consequences. He says: “People will get sick and die, because they don’t know their neighbours. And the health effects of social isolation are of the same magnitude as people smoking. If we can care about people smoking, because that reduces their life expectancy, they why not think about social isolation too?”
The pervasive dissatisfaction with the GDP-oriented, growth-driven model of development is becoming increasingly evident. The idea of human development as an alternative to economic growth has gained wide acceptance across large parts of the world. In the past few years there has come about a growing realization that though the human development index has proved to be a fairly reliable indicator of human progress, it needs to be supplemented with new parameters such as sustainability, equity, environmental costs and benefits, social capital and happiness. This realization is a consequence of contemporary concerns, new researches and current thinking, and the availability of new and better survey data. A growing number of social scientists and policy makers have now come to believe that the overarching goal of social intervention and planning and policy research should be human well-being.
At the same time, many scholars and academics point out that human well-being is too complex a phenomenon to be reduced to a single number or to be amenable to statistical abstraction. Nevertheless, a holistic, broad-based set of indicators, such as the one suggested by the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission, can go a long way in addressing concerns that deeply affect the lives of people around the world. The exploration of reliable indicators of human well-being, which is currently underway, may draw on such parameters as social cohesion and societal engagement (in the context of increasing societal fragmentation and rupture in large parts of the world), recognition and accommodation of cultural diversity, ‘moral capital’ (the psychological and spiritual fibre that can serve serves as the bedrock of character and that can revitalize human relationships, and ‘multicommunitarian capital’—the sharing of social, cultural and civic spaces in the context of multiethnic societies. 7
1. Jon Gertner, ‘The Rise and Fall of the GDP’ The New York Times, May 10, 2010
2. Mahbub ul Haq: Reflections on Human Development. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996, p. 14
3. Mahbub ul Haq: Ibid, pp. 16-23
4. Mahbub ul Haq and Khadija Haq: Human Development in South Asia. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997, p. 15
5. Joseph E. Stiglitz: Making Globalization Work. New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 2006, pp. 123-24
6. Jon Gertner, ‘The Rise and Fall of the GDP’ The New York Times, May 10, 2010
7. A. R. Momin, ‘Multicommunitarianism in a fragmented world’ Asia-Europe Journal, Vol. 3 (2004), pp. 445-59; A. R. Momin, ‘Towards a multicommunitarian Europe’ (Lecture delivered at the Institute of Sociology, Bonn University, Germany on 27 April 2008); A. R. Momin, ‘Multicommunitarianism as a perspective on living together in multiethnic societies’ in H. J-Findeis, Werner Gephart and Indra Munshi (eds): An Unfolding Landscape: Diversity, Interculturality and Change in India (forthcoming)