Disparities in Development S M. Vidwans I HAD made eight points in my critique (June 3,1989) of K Sita and K Seeta Prabhu (KSP for short): (1) KSP's method of scoring cannot measure disparities; (2) their attempt to identify major areas of out-migration is defeated by the defective official statistics; (3) the level of development and migration seem to be positively related in south Konkan; (4) one should distinguish between out-migration and daily commutation before relating such variables as availability of bus-stops to the former; (5) there is a logical confusion when one first works out an aggregative indicator of development and then switches back to individual indicators to draw selective conclusions; (6) the basic question about the type of economic indicators (areaor people- based) to be used; (7) KSFs statement about west coast railway has no basis in their exercise; and (8) a question whether a large part of the inter-tahsil disparity is not accounted for by the inter-district disparity between the present Ratnagiri and Sindhu- durg districts. In addition, I had made six minor points in the footnotes to my critique. In their reply (October 14, 1989), KSP have dealt with the points (1), (2), (5) and (7), and accepted the point (3), but have left other main points unanswered.
