Hyperglobalisation has been used to describe the dramatic increase in international trade witnessed for about a decade and a half from the early 1990s up to the global financial crisis of 2008. The imagery intended is one of an increasing connectedness among nations leading to a virtuous cycle of economic expansion.
By a trait common to every generation, we tend to assume that ours is somehow unique, in this case with respect to globalisation. However, if we are to take the long view, we would find that this is no more than a conceit. Starting some time in the last quarter of the 19th century, for close to 50 years, the world saw an expansion in trade that was actually as great or even greater than during the recently concluded phase. Then had also occurred an unprecedented movement of capital and of people. British capital flowed into building the railways across the world, immigrants moved from Europe to the United States and Asian labour was moved to the sites of deployment of western capital.
End of a phase
So, the facts are that the world has seen the waxing and waning of global traffic in goods, capital and people.
To be precise, the phase of high trade starting 1870 came to an end with the First World War and was to revive, slowly, only after the Second. Then, following the collapse of East European communism in the early 1990s, there was a resurgence in global trade. Now even this phase has somewhat abruptly ended with the global financial crisis.
Economists who study trade flows have gone to the extent of claiming that hyperglobalisation was a one-time event unlikely to be repeated. Though some may hold that we ought to shun economists offering predictions with as much diligence as we should beware of enemies bearing gifts, it may pay us to heed their prognosis, for were it to be true, it has implications for economic possibilities in India.
Note that even if vigour were to return to the global economy 25 years from now, that would still account for a significant chunk of the working life of an Indian, for which period alternative economic opportunities would have to be found.
Role of technology
What underlies the scepticism expressed regarding a revival of global trade?
The view is based on the observation that especially 19th century globalisation was underpinned by technological advances that facilitated trade. The advent of the telegraph is alluded to along with the invention of the internal combustion engine. The former enabled the communications infrastructure intrinsic to trade and the latter enabled the fast, reliable and cheap transportation of goods across seas. These advances, we are told, dwarf anything since, including the Internet, in terms of their capacity to expand trade. And, none is foreseen in the immediate future.
This account of how advances in technology fueled trade is of undoubted relevance but remains partial in that it leaves out the role of the growth in demand for these technologies. It was, after all, the growing market for British goods as Indian manufacturing was dislodged following military conquest and as British capital flowed into the laying of a rail network in parts of Latin America and Africa that provided the demand for development of cheaper communication and transportation technology.
Therefore, it may as well be said that trade expanded as the demand for goods grew. However, it is yet true that when global demand expands, countries can exploit the trade route to grow their economies. This was the great promise of globalisation held out to the developing countries in the 1990s. Now, what does all this have to do with us in India today? A great deal, actually.
The slowdown and India
If the world economy is set to grow slowly for the foreseeable future, a premise of much of the economic policy in India since 1991 would have to be replaced. It had been assumed then that globalisation was here to stay and India had only to hitch onto its current to ride to prosperity.
This India has even successfully done in phases since. Now, however, we need to recognise that the game may have changed substantially — even if not irrevocably, as the experts claim. The shift that has taken place is visible most in the IT industry. Quarterly growth only inches forward there and insecurity grips its particularly young workforce.
In retrospect, we can see the hollowness of the boast that had made the rounds a decade ago that India need not bother with manufacturing when it could leapfrog into a service economy led by IT exports. Now, “bricks and mortar” is no longer something to be spurned and soiling our hands may be part of the business of earning our living for some time to come.
Recognising the diminished tempo of globalisation, India’s economic policymakers must address the growth of the home market, which is the demand for goods and services emanating from within the country. The immediate points of action and the appropriate instruments can be identified without much strain on our ingenuity. In the short run or the present, when the global economy is sluggish, only domestic investment can move demand.
In India, we have been witnessing slowing or depressed private investment for close to five years by now. There is a view that this has to do with tight monetary policy. It is true that the real lending rate for firms has been rising as inflation is falling. Such a policy stance can be justified only by resorting to the claim that the Reserve Bank of India knows something about future inflation that we don’t, in particular that inflation is set to rise again soon.
Barring this possibility, there is a case for cutting the repo rate now, and there is a clamour for this. But there are reasons to doubt the potency of such an action, one each from the supply and the demand sides. Given that they hold non-performing assets, the banks are extremely wary of lending. Any significant resumption of lending by banks may be hostage to their first resolving the bad loans problem. Ditto with the firms, which are themselves debt-laden. Are they likely to take on more of it, just because it is offered at a lower rate, before cleaning up their balance sheets?
On public investment
Independently of the ‘twin balance sheet problem’, Keynesian economics has long recognised that lowering the rate of interest may not do much for private investment if the expected rate of return is depressed.
The slowing of both global trade and domestic manufacturing may have had precisely this effect by lowering the long-term expectations held by private investors. We do, however, know how to buoy up flagging demand. You do this through public investment.
In response to the argument heard at the highest level of policymaking that there are no viable projects to be had, one need only refer to a recent news report on the state of our roads and bridges.
It is reported that 23 bridges and tunnels on India’s national highways are over 100 years old, of which 17 require rehabilitation or major maintenance. As many as 123 other bridges in the country require immediate attention and 6,000 are “structurally distressed”.
Infrastructure is unique in that spending on it raises aggregate demand and when it actually comes on stream, it raises the productivity of investment elsewhere in the economy. ‘Roads and bridges’ are a metaphor for the public infrastructure that the Indian economy can fruitfully absorb today.
Recent Posts
- In the Large States category (overall), Chhattisgarh ranks 1st, followed by Odisha and Telangana, whereas, towards the bottom are Maharashtra at 16th, Assam at 17th and Gujarat at 18th. Gujarat is one State that has seen startling performance ranking 5th in the PAI 2021 Index outperforming traditionally good performing States like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, but ranks last in terms of Delta
- In the Small States category (overall), Nagaland tops, followed by Mizoram and Tripura. Towards the tail end of the overall Delta ranking is Uttarakhand (9th), Arunachal Pradesh (10th) and Meghalaya (11th). Nagaland despite being a poor performer in the PAI 2021 Index has come out to be the top performer in Delta, similarly, Mizoram’s performance in Delta is also reflected in it’s ranking in the PAI 2021 Index
- In terms of Equity, in the Large States category, Chhattisgarh has the best Delta rate on Equity indicators, this is also reflected in the performance of Chhattisgarh in the Equity Pillar where it ranks 4th. Following Chhattisgarh is Odisha ranking 2nd in Delta-Equity ranking, but ranks 17th in the Equity Pillar of PAI 2021. Telangana ranks 3rd in Delta-Equity ranking even though it is not a top performer in this Pillar in the overall PAI 2021 Index. Jharkhand (16th), Uttar Pradesh (17th) and Assam (18th) rank at the bottom with Uttar Pradesh’s performance in line with the PAI 2021 Index
- Odisha and Nagaland have shown the best year-on-year improvement under 12 Key Development indicators.
- In the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Goa and Tamil Nadu and, the bottom three performers are Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand and Bihar.
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers were Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim and Mizoram; and, the bottom three performers are Manipur, Assam and Meghalaya.
- Among the 60:40 division States, Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top three performers and Tamil Nadu, Telangana and Delhi appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland; and, the bottom three performers are Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh
- Among the 60:40 division States, Goa, West Bengal and Delhi appear as the top three performers and Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Bihar appear as the bottom three performers.
- Among the 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Himachal Pradesh and Tripura were the top three performers and Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh were the bottom three performers
- West Bengal, Bihar and Tamil Nadu were the top three States amongst the 60:40 division States; while Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan appeared as the bottom three performers
- In the case of 90:10 division States, Mizoram, Assam and Tripura were the top three performers and Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand featured as the bottom three
- Among the 60:40 division States, the top three performers are Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa and the bottom three performers are Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand and Goa
- In the 90:10 division States, the top three performers are Mizoram, Sikkim and Nagaland and the bottom three performers are Manipur and Assam
In a diverse country like India, where each State is socially, culturally, economically, and politically distinct, measuring Governance becomes increasingly tricky. The Public Affairs Index (PAI 2021) is a scientifically rigorous, data-based framework that measures the quality of governance at the Sub-national level and ranks the States and Union Territories (UTs) of India on a Composite Index (CI).
States are classified into two categories – Large and Small – using population as the criteria.
In PAI 2021, PAC defined three significant pillars that embody Governance – Growth, Equity, and Sustainability. Each of the three Pillars is circumscribed by five governance praxis Themes.
The themes include – Voice and Accountability, Government Effectiveness, Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
At the bottom of the pyramid, 43 component indicators are mapped to 14 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that are relevant to the States and UTs.
This forms the foundation of the conceptual framework of PAI 2021. The choice of the 43 indicators that go into the calculation of the CI were dictated by the objective of uncovering the complexity and multidimensional character of development governance
The Equity Principle
The Equity Pillar of the PAI 2021 Index analyses the inclusiveness impact at the Sub-national level in the country; inclusiveness in terms of the welfare of a society that depends primarily on establishing that all people feel that they have a say in the governance and are not excluded from the mainstream policy framework.
This requires all individuals and communities, but particularly the most vulnerable, to have an opportunity to improve or maintain their wellbeing. This chapter of PAI 2021 reflects the performance of States and UTs during the pandemic and questions the governance infrastructure in the country, analysing the effectiveness of schemes and the general livelihood of the people in terms of Equity.
Growth and its Discontents
Growth in its multidimensional form encompasses the essence of access to and the availability and optimal utilisation of resources. By resources, PAI 2021 refer to human resources, infrastructure and the budgetary allocations. Capacity building of an economy cannot take place if all the key players of growth do not drive development. The multiplier effects of better health care, improved educational outcomes, increased capital accumulation and lower unemployment levels contribute magnificently in the growth and development of the States.
The Pursuit Of Sustainability
The Sustainability Pillar analyses the access to and usage of resources that has an impact on environment, economy and humankind. The Pillar subsumes two themes and uses seven indicators to measure the effectiveness of government efforts with regards to Sustainability.
The Curious Case Of The Delta
The Delta Analysis presents the results on the State performance on year-on-year improvement. The rankings are measured as the Delta value over the last five to 10 years of data available for 12 Key Development Indicators (KDI). In PAI 2021, 12 indicators across the three Pillars of Equity (five indicators), Growth (five indicators) and Sustainability (two indicators). These KDIs are the outcome indicators crucial to assess Human Development. The Performance in the Delta Analysis is then compared to the Overall PAI 2021 Index.
Key Findings:-
In the Scheme of Things
The Scheme Analysis adds an additional dimension to ranking of the States on their governance. It attempts to complement the Governance Model by trying to understand the developmental activities undertaken by State Governments in the form of schemes. It also tries to understand whether better performance of States in schemes reflect in better governance.
The Centrally Sponsored schemes that were analysed are National Health Mission (NHM), Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services scheme (ICDS), Mahatma Gandh National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (SmSA) and MidDay Meal Scheme (MDMS).
National Health Mission (NHM)
INTEGRATED CHILD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (ICDS)
MID- DAY MEAL SCHEME (MDMS)
SAMAGRA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN (SMSA)
MAHATMA GANDHI NATIONAL RURAL EMPLOYMENT GUARANTEE SCHEME (MGNREGS)