Blog Archives

India on the cusp of change: States must shun exclusive growth policies,opt for inclusion

With the election fever on in Gujarat and the hugely pro-Modi mood in the state, from what little I have heard from family and acquaintance living an visiting the state, an editorial that questions the Gujarat growth model certainly gets attention! Atul Sood’s piece in The Hindu today points out that the state’s growth path is exclusionary. He argues that compared to other states with similar growth rates- Maharashtra, Haryana, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat has not done well in the traditional indicators for development. Employment has remained stagnant, including manufacturing employment. The manufacturing sector is also showing a slow growth of wages (less than the other three States) and increasing use of contract workers. Sood points out that “the worsening condition of workers in the manufacturing sector is accompanied by increasing profitability and growing investment in the sector.” Both rural and urban per capital monthly consumption expenditure in Gujarat has grown at lower rates these past five years than before that and is also lower than the other three States.

The author, who is one of ten independent researchers who have been published in a recent study ‘Poverty Amidst Prosperity: Essays on the Trajectory of Development in Gujarat’ cites Gujarat’s experience as a window to really understand the limitations of market-led growth without a policy vision that equally works to mitigate the negative impacts of this development model.

For those of us who work in the development sector, or are aware of the issues associated with it, this is an essential dilemma. How will the trickle-down effect happen? Or the trickle-up for that matter, for those who believe the demand will be led by Bottom of the Pyramid customers, who would need a certain amount of disposable income and a fairly stable quality of life to actually spend, right?

How do you reconcile situations where enormous economic growth is concurrent with rising levels of incoe disparity, and we see this in other developing economies as well. For instance, Brazil is 85% urbanized, has a hugely social emphasis on city planning and governance but has a Gini coeffieicent of 0.54 in 2009, where 1 indicates absolute inequality. That is considered fairly unpalatable and there is a fair amount of literature on how Brazil’s tax system in pro-rich, how the urban-rural divide is too stark and certainly there is now considerable focus on improving this figure.

As per economists Laveesh Bhandari and Suryakant Yadav, the urban Gini coefficient in India went from 0.35 in 2005 to 0.65 today (taken from Pratap Bhanu Mehta’s article on ‘How India Stumbled-Can New Delhi get its groove back?’ in Foreign Affairs, July/August 2012). Now this is really worrying, to me. And I tend to agree that we really need to look beyond purely pro-market moves to a more balanced vision of growth, even if it means bringing GDP down a few notches but actually ensuring a slightly more equitable distribution of that wealth.

I know that is a very socialist view and not appreciated by many (esp in the bourgeois wealth-driven mindset that we currently inhabit), but we must not forget that India was established, as per our Constitution as a “sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic Republic.” Along with compromising on democracy (ref: FB arrests and the PIL filed by Shreya Singhal against Section 66A), and of course now and then questioning whether secular is really how we feel about ourselves, we are also moving away from our socialist intent as a people. I agree with many experts, who believe that India is at that place where it can choose its development path, and we can actually opt for a more inclusive, longer term vision of growth. Unfortunately, the political compulsions do not allow for that sort of decision making. And it falls on civil society, NGOs and other sorts of practitioners in the development space to find innovative ways to include the poor into the process of growth; and to constantly clamor for better policy, better implementation, better political will!

Maniacal media mongering is hurting India’s story more than falling output or policy deadlock- June 15, 2012

‘Is India’s Growth Story Over?’, says a Time headline. Other lesser publications have gone to town talking about the possibility of Indian being the first ‘fallen angel’ among the BRIC countries. Fallen angel? Seriously?

The panic mongers may have the last laugh (though I sincerely hope not!), but I find it really hard to palate this hyperbole. I find it laughable that an agency like Standard & Poor, which should aim for increased credibility, would resort to using flowery language like ‘fallen angel’! And just for that, I tend to believe they are also playing to the gallery in something that seems to have become a media and public relations game rather than a real assessment to inform investors.

Yes, certainly, India is facing a political deadlock and a sluggishness that is unfortunate. However, compared to the global climate, we are still a growing economy with plenty of potential. Unfortunately, for us Indians, our tendency is to not learn from downturns and shock. Rather, when India managed to brave a worldwide recession, instead of looking long and hard at where we could bolster ourselves for the future as global economies kept sliding, we spent a lot of time patting our own backs and ridiculing the West for not having sufficient safeguards in place.

Well, what we are facing now is the fallout of that sort of complacence. We also excel at riding high and long on small wins. Public perception in India of India can change from day to day, and I mainly refer to that when I say ‘we’ (I genuinely believe policymakers and entities like the RBI are quite level headed in their decisions). Foreign investors on the other hand, have had issues with India for a very long time. The policy issues, corruption and red tape have long inhibited investors and will continue to do so, irrespective of ratings.

Interestingly, stats show that absolute  investment was highest in 2008-09 (at US$ 41,874 million) and dips by about 10-13% in the following two years. This year, from April 2011 to Jan 2012, US$ 38,346 million have come in as FDI as per provisional estimates by the DIPP.

I am genuinely concerned about S&P’s statements because they seem very alarmist. I am more concerned about Indian media houses presenting the S&P point of view as larger than life and giving relatively less space to the defence by the government, which is also very balanced in its own right. In this respect, I found the following but from the Time article very reassuring. From my limited (very) perspective, I tend to agree.

According to Rajesh Chakrabarti, assistant professor of finance at the Indian School of Business, the possibility of a downgrade by S&P is not surprising, since the India brand has been taking a hit on many fronts for the past several months. However, he is not convinced by the reasoning offered by the agency. “While there is indeed a slowdown on policy initiatives and growth has slowed down, the fact that a country [could lose] its rating because some of the anticipated things did not happen is a rather strange argument. Normally, a downgrade would happen because of adverse events rather than non-happening of positive events.” He adds that growth slowing down per se is not a risk factor. “While [slower growth] may reduce the prospects of future gains, it does not make the country more risky.”

I am deeply disturbed by media that thrives on creating panic. Do they not understand that the domino effect of panic and dejection alone can cost our economy billions? We can still look at a realistic growth estimate of 6% this financial year, far better than EU’s 2011 growth rate of 1.6% and United States 1.5% and even South Africa’s 3.4% (they were recently added to to the BRICS). If anything, educated, middle class Indians should push for better governance at local level and campaign relentlessly for reforms. Occupy movements should be about think

Even so, if S&P’s maniacal statements push reforms through, I’ll take back my whining!

A vibrant construction industry based on shoddy treatment of laborers? Shame! 1 May, 2012

At work, I’m part of a team working to set up a system for certifying affordable housing projects. The initiative is that of the Ashoka Innovators for the Public and we at mHS are working on the aspects of the rating system that would impact the low-income community.

Anyway, during our discussions, we often come to the point where we wonder if the rating should consider whether the contractor uses ethical and legal practices for treatment and payment meted out to labor working on the project. If they use child labor, for instance, or use sub-standard shelter to house their labor, they should drop lower in the ratings, we think.

Today, on the occasion of Labor Day, The Hindu carried an excellent editorial written by Moushumi Basu on the subject. She spells out clearly the Acts contractors and construction companies violate when they pay lower wages, do not build decent shelter, do not ensure safe conditions for work, etc. Moreover, developers and construction companies who have ridden the wave of India’s GDP growth (and continue to do so despite slower growth) have no business to do this at the cost of the labor that works for them. It is a sad tale of mistreatment of those who have no voice. Besides the legality, where’s the humanity here? Would it really hurt to pass on a tiny bit of your profits towards improving the lives of those that made your projects possible, often risking their lives, migrating far from their homes?

So in our ratings projects, we’re really wondering….how do we factor in the humanity/ethics (or lack of these) of developers into ratings for affordable housing, where profit margins are lower than regular projects, when they fail to factor in regular projects where profit margins are decent?

%d bloggers like this: