Indian Economy and the Crisis of a Borrowed Development Strategy
Arun Kumar.
CESP,SSS,JNU.
Mainstream, Vol. Li, No 35, August 17, 2013 - Independence Day Special
Introduction:
The Current Situation
The economic growth rate has been falling continuously
while the consumer price inflation, current account deficit in the external
sector and fiscal deficit in the Budget remain at high levels. The lack of
confidence in the Indian economy is manifested by the sudden and sharp decline
in the value of the rupee vis-a-vis the dollar in spite of the steps taken by
the government and the Reserve Bank of India. The stock markets are also
fluctuating wildly reflecting the uncertainty in the minds of the investors—
both Indian and foreign. The policy-makers appear to be helpless.
The government has tried to talk the markets up but with
little effect. The PM, Finance Minister, Deputy Chairman of the Planning
Commission and Economic Advisor to the PM have all made pronouncements that the
economic recovery is around the corner. These predictions over the last two
years have been belied as the data in the Table shows. The rate of growth has
fallen quarter after quarter since the fourth quarter of 2010-11.
It is true that the rate of growth is still good compared
both to that of most other countries in the world or to the projections by the
IMF (and others) of the expected rate of growth of the world economy. This
growth is also comparable to India’s historical growth rate since independence.
However, the current growth path is not comparable with that prior to 1991
because that was not creating inequality and unemployment which the current
marginalising growth has been doing.
Post-1991, growth has been fuelled by the private corporate
sector with highly capital intensive technology which does not generate much
employment and also increases inequality in the economy. Most of the gains have
been cornered by a few leaving little to trickle down to others. This is
especially true for the marginalised sections like the unorganised sectors and
especially the agricultural sector which still deploys more than half of the
work force. The impact of the slowdown in the growth rate is that what trickles
down becomes even less and those at the bottom of the pyramid suffer even more.
Coupled with the declining economic growth rate is a
stubbornly high rate of inflation measured by consumer prices (roughly 10 per
cent per annum). While the wholesale price index (WPI)-based inflation has
moderated, it does not reflect the burden of price rise on the consumer. The
WPI-based inflation rate does not reflect the rise in prices of services, like
school fees or rents or telephone calls and so on. The consumer price index has
only a few services; so it also under-represents inflation. The price rise
results in shifting purchasing power from the consumers to businesses and
thereby reducing the trickle-down and accentuating disparities.
Add to this the rising black income generation in the
economy with corruption spreading and growing in scale. Since the black economy
is concentrated in the hands of three per cent of the population, inequalities
rise. By raising costs all round, the rate of inflation is raised. Further, the
inefficiencies associated with the black economy result in wasteful use of
capital and lower employment generation than is potentially possible. Through
flight of capital it increases the shortage of capital and aggravates the
current account deficit on the external sector and leads to BOP problems. Last
but not the least, it results in the failure of policies so that targets are
not achieved. It affects the collection of taxes and that raises the
government’s budgetary deficits which leads to a cut-back in essential
expenditures, say, on health and education.
In brief, under the New Economic Policies (NEP) with their
pro-corporate sector bias and with a rising black economy, the combination of
low rates of economic growth and persisting high inflation results in poor
employment generation and mounting inequality. This is a dangerous mix since it
can only lead to growing social tensions and political strife in the country 66
years after we achieved political independence.
Consumerism
and Environmental Decline along the Path of Development
Sixty six years after independence, we have the largest
number of poor people, illiterates and so on in the world. It is not that India
has not made progress after independence but it is much less than what was
expected. It is much less than what many other nations have achieved in a
comparable time-span. India appears to be a case of many missed opportunities.
Further, at a very low level of consumption, India has one
of the most polluted environments in the world. The pollution of water in the
rivers and underground aquifers is phenomenal leading to increased incidence of
various diseases. The pollution of air is also very high compared to even the
developed countries and this is also resulting in health problems. The tragedy
is that this is at a very low level of per capita consumption. What would
happen when with growth consumption rises?
The causes of this high level of pollution are: a) the
strategy of ‘growth at any cost’ without taking the environmental factors into
account; b) the rampant corruption which leads to cutting corners in every
economic activity with environ-mental protection getting the least priority; c)
international division of labour which is resulting in polluting industries
getting located in the developing countries; and d) rapid increase in
consumerism.
Recycling of ships, plastic waste, lead acid, computer
waste and so on is taking place in India. Dirty production of heavy chemicals
and metals is also occurring here. Massive denudation of forests is the result
of open cast mining, large projects for producing power, setting up of
airports, expansion of road and rail networks and so on. It is said that
development requires all this. Is this true? Not quite since environmental
destruction lowers the welfare gains of material growth. It is like digging
holes and filling them where there is activity without productivity. One needs
to question the development model which postpones the costs to the future
generations.
Underlying consumerism is a political strategy of the
Indian ruling elite to divert the attention of the population from the present
problems by involving them in consumerism. Those who can afford to consume more
are happy at the availability of goods in the markets. Those who cannot afford
can dream of one day buying these goods. There are those in the middle who
aspire to lay their hands on the more exotic ones while buying some of the less
exotic ones. Everyone is happy to live in the moment and the future be damned—a
very short-term strategy and one that is inimical to building a strong nation
and creates atomisation and alienation amongst the people.
The
Internal and the External
Economic
Problems
The external environment for India’s economic development
has deteriorated since the global crisis began in 2007. Due to the ongoing
indiscriminate globalisation initiated in 1991, Indian markets have become more
closely integrated with the world markets. The ratio of our exports and imports
to the GDP have risen dramatically. Movements in the financial markets (like
the share market) are now governed by those in the international markets.
Commodity prices move in tandem with international prices like in the case of
petroleum products and foodgrains. The result is that a crisis in the global
markets leads to a crisis in the Indian economy.
Since the recovery from the recession starting 2007 was
tepid in the OECD countries, the Indian economy also faltered soon after the
recovery stalled there. The green shoots in the US economy in 2009-10 withered
after 2010. Unemployment there has remained high and so has underemployment.
Eurozone has gone back into recession and so has the British economy. The
Japanese economy has been growing slowly and the Chinese economy has been
slowing down recently. Thus, all the major economies of the world have been
growing slowly or slowing down.
India’s exports have consequently suffered. (See Table)
Imports have remained high because of the high prices of energy and India’s
rising demand for energy. Further, due to uncertainty the demand for gold in
India has remained high in a period when gold prices have risen globally. Thus,
the gold and energy import bills have been high keeping the import bill high.
This is the reason for the continuing high trade account and current account
deficits. The problem has been aggravated by the high debt ($ 365 billion in
September 2012) in relation to the reserves ($295 billion in January 2013) the
country holds, and this prevents the RBI from intervening more aggressively.
Further, the proportion of short-term debt in the total debt has increased
since 2008 and this is the one that can evaporate quickly destabilising the
position of the country’s foreign exchange reserves.
With the slowing down of the Indian economy, high rate of
inflation and fiscal problems, the international community has been losing
confidence in the Indian economy. Thus, the credit rating agencies have been
threatening to lower India’s rating. This would lead to a higher cost of
borrowing abroad and devaluation of the currency adding to the repayment
burden. These would lead to an increase in the current account deficit. This
sets up a vicious cycle of declining growth, higher current account deficit and
lowered credit rating for India.
The rating agencies monitor the fiscal deficit of the
country. So, the government has been trying to keep the fiscal deficit low. How
is that being done? By cutting back on Plan expenditures (two years back by
about Rs 1 lakh crore and in the last fiscal by more than that) and other
essential expenditures. This is like chopping the nose to cure a cold. Cutbacks
in a period of a slowing economy and demand shortage lead to further demand
shortage and a further slowing down. Thus, the fiscal deficit target is being
met by cutting back expenditures and not better management and in this sense
the fiscal situation is out of control in spite of the fiscal deficit not
rising dramatically. This strategy, which keeps the growth rate low, is bound
to make the rating agencies lower India’s rating.
The savings and investment rate of the Indian economy fell
after 2007. It has not recovered and, as the Table shows, it has fallen further
in the previous two years. This is a cause of the slowdown in the economy. Both
the private corporate sector and public sector companies are flush with funds
but are not investing since the demand is limited. Thus, the government’s
strategy of dealing with the problem has become the cause of the problem.
The current problem facing the economy is the external
orientation of the policy-makers. They are sensitive to the wishes of the
discredited rating agencies and multilateral agencies. This outward orientation
of the policy-maker has marginalised the Indian population at large. No wonder,
economic experts being appointed in the government are being imported from the
US.
The
External Orientation of the Indian Policy-makers: A Historical Perspective
India started in 1947 with a borrowed strategy of
development which propagated the top-down approach. It was a mixed economy
model based on the market economy in the West and the path of central planning
from the Soviets. India’s ingenuity lay in combining the two paths but both
were copied and based on trickle-down. This is called the Nehruvian strategy of
development. The indigenous path suggested by Gandhi based on a bottom-up
approach was rejected because the Indian elite wanted to quickly copy Western
modernity and join the Western elite. Consequently, while a small elite did
well, the rest had to plod along with the little that trickled down. This
strategy paid lip-service to the poor and poverty removal. It met with crisis
after crisis since the mid-1960s—failure of agriculture and consequent food
insecurity, Naxalism, Emergency, rising strife, alienation and black economy
and growing inefficiencies, repeated approach to the multi-lateral agencies for
help/adjustment and support at high national cost and so on.
The path met its waterloo in 1991 and the strategy was
changed from the mixed economy to the market economy with the state retreating
strategically in favour of the private sector. The trickle-down declined
further. This was characterised by the World Bank (earlier) as the ‘market
friendly state intervention’. In the Indian context with its large black
economy and high level of corruption this led to the strengthening of the
‘crony capitalism’ model of investment being followed in the country since
independence. With the lowering of the priority to public sector the private
sector became the dominant sector and it extracted huge concessions—like
ownership of natural resources and cuts in taxes. The new strategy based on
marketisation stopped paying even lip-service to the poor. We are embroiled in
the numbers game of counting the poor without eliminating poverty which has
constantly changed its face with growing consumerism and commercialisation of
everything.
While the earlier strategy produced growth which was much
faster than during the colonial period prior to 1947, it also kept the growing
disparities in check (not that it reduced them). The post-1991 strategy does
not even claim to reduce disparities because now growth is the key to development;
distribution does not matter. The policy-makers recognise this factor and,
therefore, have put into place policies to mitigate the ill-effects of the
ongoing marginalising growth: MGNREGS to get some employment for the
underemployed and for those who migrate from the poor areas to richer areas;
mid-day meal scheme to get children into schools otherwise their parents will
set them to work to supplement their family income; loan waiver scheme for
farmers so that the indebted farmers can get relief and do not commit suicide
in large numbers. Now there is the Food Security Bill which will hopefully
provide more nutrition to the poor. Today 40 per cent of the women and children
are malnourished and face disability and permanent poverty.
So, even after 66 years of independence, the
government—dominated by the elite—remains insensitive to the problems of the
people of India. It is continuing with the borrowed path of development which
leads the nation from one crisis to the next without a solution—in fact, only
non-solutions abound which result in the accumulation of more problems. To
divert the attention of the people, the policy-makers have promoted consumerism
in a big way leading to a huge environmental crisis and other problems. Thus,
what the colonised mind of the Indian elite thinks is the solution has been the
problem since independence and that is why the policy-makers currently appear
to be helpless.
[Based on the author’s new book, The Indian Economy since
Independence: Persisting Colonial Disruption, published by Vision Books, New
Delhi]
The author is the Sukhamoy Chakravarty Chair Professor,
Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal
Nehru University, New Delhi. He can be contacted at e-mail: arunkumar1000@hotmail.com /nuramarku@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment