The Congress, under Manmohan Singh, has failed to deliver consistently high growth and the numbers are now clear.
In the last nine years, Singh’s team and their policies made India grow nine per cent-plus in four years and eight per cent-plus in two years. But last year, growth was 6.2 per cent, and it is slowing down further. This year, it is expected to be five per cent, the lowest since the BJP-led alliance left power in 2004.
At about two trillion dollars, India’s economy was the tenth largest in the world last year, and it will become the eighth largest this year, ahead of Russia and Italy. But this rise in the rankings is not by itself significant.
The important aspect about India’s economy is, of course, that per capita GDP is very low.
It is only $1,500 per Indian or thereabouts, which is one-thirtieth of what it is in developed nations. We are not a middle-income nation, are a long way from becoming one and the majority of Indians are, in fact, very poor and will remain very poor for decades.
But even on this low base, our growth collapses from nine per cent to five per cent when the global economy softens. Why? It was the easy money coming in from the West, economists like Ruchir Sharma say, that lifted the Indian economy for many years of the last decade. When this dried up, we immediately sank to six per cent growth, first in 2008, and now for two consecutive years. This is remarkable and it shows that the internal thrust for high growth is missing, for the most part, in India.
So, what should be done to bring high growth back? Singh says some reforms will help but it isn’t clear to me whether the next Lok Sabha will be more capable than this one in passing reform. Also, it doesn’t seem to me that just some more reform will by itself add the missing four percentage points of growth. Some new thinking and a new strategy may be needed that addresses the lack of internal economic dynamism rather than only attracting easy money, which by most accounts isn’t coming back any time soon.
Who is going to guide the Indian economy out of these doldrums of stagnant growth?
Singh has said that he cannot rule it in or out that he will again be the Congress candidate for prime minister in 2014. I think there’s little chance that he will offer himself for the job (he will be 82 next year). He has left it ambiguous out of maturity, purely to ensure that the focus would not immediately move to Rahul Gandhi.
And there’s little chance also that the Congress will consider Singh even if he were willing.
The fact is that though he has had a reasonably good innings so far, his credibility on the economy is currently low. He has kept saying in the past couple of years that high growth will return but he has been wrong and he doesn’t seem to know when or how it will return.
We need someone who can tell us what the internal issues are and how to revive what Singh has called the “animal spirits” of entrepreneurship.
To my mind, and this is to be fair to whoever runs the economy, this is not a political or legislative problem, but a broader social and cultural one. However, it is essential that political solutions are thrown at it to see whether there is a reasonably quick fix to bring us back into high growth trajectory.
Singh has had his chance and done as well as might be expected given his handicaps. Now, it’s time for him to wind down. After 2014, when he steps aside, someone new must take charge of what is a serious problem that needs a fresh approach.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 21st, 2013.
COMMENTS (27)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Lala Gee:
In America, we have a book called "Basic Economics for Idiots". It costs less than $ 2 but contains a wealth of information for those who do not understand even the basics. Have you considered reading this simplified version of economics, including theories of Milton, Keynes, etc? You might actually begin to see the world in a different light -- away from your totally absurd and negative India fixation that colours even the simple things of life with which India and Indians (particularly Hindus whom you are so averse to) have nothing to do.
@Lala Gee: If India's approach to Kashmir problem is slowing down it's economy, it's to Pakistan's advantages that issue not be resolved. Paradoxical isn't it?
@Parvez : Well said Inequal distribution of wealth is a big issue we may face in future. Achieving double digit growth may not be enough if our poor can not get enough food to eat. Pakistan is no party to India's economy. They would better look at their own economy and democracy rather than comparing anything with India
@Lala Gee: It is in India’s own best interest, and the region’s other countries as well, to solve the pending Kashmir dispute with Pakistan, and abandon her hostile hegemonic stance towards other big and small neighbors. Is that the reason why treason charges being heaved against Musharraf the chief architect of Kargil?
We are not a middle-income nation, are a long way from becoming one and the majority of Indians are, in fact, very poor and will remain very poor for decades. Due thanks to the Congress Government, its innumerable scandals and MMS... How can you miss that Mr. Patel??
@ammar: That's because of some neibhbour's mischief politics!!! Otherwise, Kashmir is a non-issue. UN resolutions are outdated and impossible in the current demographic, geopolicitcal scenario. You can rant all you want but cant snatch Kashmir from India. Only workable solution is turning LOC in to international border. If you don't accept it, bring it on. Let's see who blinks first.
@sundeep: It is India that is keeping the IV drip lines of Kashmir.If the drip lines dry up the Kashmir is Kaput!!
@Surya: If Kashmir is non issue then what is the need for 1 million Indian troops in Kashmir !
I am no economist but I do understand that simply being obsessed with growth is not the answer for countries like ours. The big question of inequality has to be addressed in a holistic manner because if this is left unattended it negates all other gains.
@Lala Gee: We don't need certification from you regarding democracy. Country which have failed for last 65 years to setup any stable political system in their country have no right to comment on democracy. First establish democracy in your country for 65 years and then come here to comment.
@Prabhat Pal:
"@Lala Gee: You do realize that South Korea is under the danger of nuclear annihilation 24×7?"
Big difference between India and South Korea's dynamics. 1) South Korea faced nuclear threat after achieving high levels of development, both in technology and economy - India is not even close to that. 2) On land presence of US Army providing nuclear shield against any nuclear threat of miniscule nature. 3) While South Korea is not messing-up with any other country, including North Korea, India has very serious disputes with her main neighbors and is poking her nose in every neighbor's affairs.
@Surya:
"Kashmir is a non-issue to India"
Quite contrary to your claims, MM Singh recently said otherwise in the Indian Parliament (Azad Kashmir, Gilgit Baltistan). If Kashmir is really a non-issue, then why are you so shy of asking the same from Kashmiris themselves - through plebiscite, of course. Why the world's biggest democracy (in fact, hypocrisy) is so afraid of the foremost democratic right of people, that is choosing by vote.
As the article says that it was the easy money which was coming from the west and now the pace of that easy money has got very slow. There are clear reasons for the same. Firstly the policies of the current government at the centre related to taxation has put the lots of investors into ambiguity, that what is going to be the shape of taxes if we continue to pour the money into India (Eg., Vodafone Case). Secondly, there is hardly any development of Infrastructure which has made the investors stick to their investment commitments. Thirdly, the Indian corporate sector is looking more vulnerable, further harming the investment outlook. Its median leverage is far higher than what it is in companies in similar emerging markets and more than what it was before the crisis. The rise of unhedged foreign exchange loans is also a worry.
@Lala Gee:
So what you saying is if India doesn't solve Kashmir, it'll not grow as fast as it can.
What my addition is:If Pakistan and Pakistanis like your esteemed self don't stop obsessing about Kashmir, you will not grow even half of what is India growing today.
For the past 5 years Pakistan's average rate of growth is 3%, while that of India is 7.
The best favour everyone living in this part of the world, dare I call it BIP (Bunglahdaysh,India, Pakistan), alongwith the Chinese, the Indonesian, the Pilipinos etc will do to themselves is to do their best to restrict their insatiable greed. The greed to have more and more wealth and the greed to produce more and more troublemakers. I do feel guilty of being born as a troublemaker for this world. I was born in an age when no one will ever need to think about this utterly dire problem. However I feel that even then the cast was set for the future trouble that people living in all these over populated areas of the world will suffer and endure from. So the talk of the town everywhere should be to ask people at large if they want their future generation to endure worse trouble than what they endure today. They should all be told to curb their greed of having more then two children. In fact the future generation has been robbed of the priviledge of having even one child as we see the way our world is going. People must be told that European countries can now take no more. The USA is being deluged by people from the South American countries, so is Europe. Europe is being deluged by people from Asia and Africa and can take no more. Even the well to do do Chinese are now making a run for European and N. American countries. So we all should make an effort to get this message out to those who have no other means of getting this utterly vital message except throught the word of mouth of sincere people they will come across.
@Lala Gee: You do realize that South Korea is under the danger of nuclear annihilation 24x7? And transient periods of growth are not a result of geopolitics, it's the result of country's own inner politics.
i think Swaminathan aiyar would have been right man to write under this title.
Aakar, Ruchir Sharma's comments about breakout nations was applicable to all developing countries, not just India. There's enough capital out there. You have to create the conditions to attract it. External capital flows have slowed, true, but India still has a healthy tradition of domestic investment with savings rate in the mid-30%, next only to China. India is not a state economy, but a private one interfered with by the state, and MMS's "animal spirits" can only be unleashed when the Government realizes it has no business being in business - let there be the second generation of reforms, reduce Govt.'s profile in the economy, and overseas investments will return. Unfortunately, our problem is not so much economic as political - as long as Sonia Gandhi and her inept cronies think that subsidies and mindless welfare schemes will win the elections for the party, we will continue with our economic decline!
@Lala Gee: Before commenting on India's relation with its neighbour first look at your country, what you have done to Afganistan. You think Afganistan is your fifth state.
@Lala Gee: First learn economics then come here to comment. What has Kashmir got to do with India economy?
It is only Pakistani military who relates kashmir with India economy because they have no knowledge about economy. If they had then they would have not spent large amount of money on defence.No international economist ever talked about Kashmir issue and its impact on India economy. It is only Paki who have no knowledge who always comment in this manner. If you people think you are so knowledgebale then please use your skills to improve your economy.
@Lala Gee: India's growth, high or low, is due to its own policies and structural issues. Worry about Pakistan which is closer than ever to loan default..Kashmir is a non-issue to India..
@LalaGee: I feel sorry for you if you believe what you wrote. but then you are LalaGee, the person with a single agenda item.
I loved Dr Manmohan Singh, being an economist and professional. I and many persons are disappointed with Dr Singh's executive decisions. I am not a fan of Mr Narendra Modi, but who is there in the Congress and Opposition who could be Prime Minister of India in 2012.
"After 2014, when he steps aside, someone new must take charge of what is a serious problem that needs a fresh approach."
Modi.
As long as India has hot disputes with the major countries of the region, achieving a consistent high economic growth rate will always be a remote possibility, no matter who is in power - save for the transient periods of high growth caused by international geopolitical events, as was the case in the recent past. It is in India's own best interest, and the region's other countries as well, to solve the pending Kashmir dispute with Pakistan, and abandon her hostile hegemonic stance towards other big and small neighbors. No significant large scale high-tech foreign investment - like Japan, Germany, China, and South Korea - can come to a region exposed to nuclear threats, how remote that might be though.
Dear Aakar, write about things you know about. You clearly don't understand economics and to be precise macroeconomics, therefore there is no need for you to indulge in it.
Interesting - it appears that you are laying the blame for poor economic growth squarely at the doorstep of Dr. Manmohan Singh because you know that he won't be back for another innings, and can thus be retired to shoulder the entire blame for actions of a government that has set new records in both corruption and sycophancy; so Dr. Singh will exit stage right in the illustrious footsteps of Narasimha Rao to never be heard of again after his final act as sacrificial lamb, which is anyway the role that our far-sighted Queen Bee recruited him for. Since Chidambaram may remain useful in the future to the party/ family, you chose to leave him out of this entire piece, despite the fact that ensuring economic growth is his job and not the PM's.