Receive Daily Updates
India needs a third generation of policy economists to provide the political leadership with a broad future agenda on the economy
In an interview he gave to The Indian Express in July 2016 to mark 25 years of economic reforms, Manmohan Singh spoke about the importance of the policy economists who had worked on the reforms agenda in the years preceding the actual event. His statement needs fresh attention at a time when Arvind Panagariya has resigned from NITI Aayog. Two other lateral entries into government in the past few years also moved on after short stints – Kaushik Basu and Raghuram Rajan.
Economic policy is a collaborative effort between political leaders, civil servants and policy economists. The 1991 reforms would definitely not have been possible without the political backing provided by P V Narasimha Rao.
The radical policy changes were pushed through an inertial bureaucracy by senior civil servants such as A N Verma and Naresh Chandra. And a stellar group of policy economists prepared the ground for the change of direction in the years preceding the actual event.
Most of them were lateral entries into government – Manmohan Singh, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Bimal Jalan, Vijay Kelkar, C Rangarajan, Shankar Acharya, Rakesh Mohan and several others. These economists stayed on for many decades, though a few lateral entries such as Vijay Joshi and Ashok Desai had short stints.
Some of their contributions through the 1980s – and this is not a comprehensive list – are worth repeating here. Manmohan Singh wrote the landmark seventh Five-year Plan that shifted the focus of industrial policy from asset creation to productivity.
Ahluwalia was at the forefront of trade reforms. He also wrote the famous “M Document” in the summer of 1990, which anticipated many of the major policy reforms announced between 1991 and 1993.
Bimal Jalan was the main author of the long-term fiscal policy.
Vijay Kelkar was the driving force behind fiscal and tax reforms, including the goods and services tax.
C Rangarajan committed the Reserve Bank of India to monetary targeting, and also worked hard to end the automatic monetisation of fiscal deficits.
Shankar Acharya was arguably the most influential chief economic adviser ever.
Rakesh Mohan prepared the industrial policy reforms agenda.
Also, outside experts such as M Narasimham and Raja Chelliah provided road maps for financial and tax reforms.
The team that provided intellectual heft to the economic reforms was the second generation of economists in government. It replaced an earlier generation that had people such as C D Deshmukh, J J Anjaria, I G Patel, L K Jha, P N Dhar, Lovraj Kumar, Pitambar Pant – while the Planning Commission itself had used the talents of young economists such as Jagdish Bhagwati, Amartya Sen and T N Srinivasan.
At the same time, B R Shenoy, M Narasimham, Deena Khatkhate, Anand Chandavarkar and V V Bhat were in the economics department of the Reserve Bank of India.
India now needs a third generation of policy economists to provide the political leadership with a broad future agenda on the economy, as well as advice on how to manage it in the short term.
The cupboard looks a bit bare right now, despite the presence of talented economists such as Urjit Patel, Arvind Subramanian, Bibek Debroy, Viral Acharya and Sanjeev Sanyal. This is in sharp contrast to the manner in which China has upgraded the quality of its economic administrators over the past decade, though that reflects not just the political will to get experts into government but also the rapid advances in the quality of Chinese university education.
There are two intersecting routes to strengthen economic expertise in Indian policy. First, there is a crying need to bring a new generation of policy economists into government, similar to what happened in the 1950s and then in the 1980s.
Second, the task of policy research should be done in collaboration with a network of universities and research institutes across the country.
The path-breaking Economic Surveys helmed by Arvind Subramanian over the past three years are an excellent example of how young economists from within the finance ministry, as well as from outside, can be brought into the policy process. More of this needs to be done.
There is a growing chorus of voices arguing that governments do not need economists. All they need are good administrators. The reality is more complex. A motoring analogy could be useful. It is the political system alone that has the right to decide which direction a country should be moving in. Then there is the need for experts to design policy paths that will help the country get there. And the eventual journey is highly dependent on good administrators who keep the vehicle on the road.
India seems to be weak on one of the three components of good economic management right now.
Recent Posts
Petrol in India is cheaper than in countries like Hong Kong, Germany and the UK but costlier than in China, Brazil, Japan, the US, Russia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, a Bank of Baroda Economics Research report showed.
Rising fuel prices in India have led to considerable debate on which government, state or central, should be lowering their taxes to keep prices under control.
The rise in fuel prices is mainly due to the global price of crude oil (raw material for making petrol and diesel) going up. Further, a stronger dollar has added to the cost of crude oil.
Amongst comparable countries (per capita wise), prices in India are higher than those in Vietnam, Kenya, Ukraine, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Venezuela. Countries that are major oil producers have much lower prices.
In the report, the Philippines has a comparable petrol price but has a per capita income higher than India by over 50 per cent.
Countries which have a lower per capita income like Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Venezuela have much lower prices of petrol and hence are impacted less than India.
“Therefore there is still a strong case for the government to consider lowering the taxes on fuel to protect the interest of the people,” the report argued.
India is the world’s third-biggest oil consuming and importing nation. It imports 85 per cent of its oil needs and so prices retail fuel at import parity rates.
With the global surge in energy prices, the cost of producing petrol, diesel and other petroleum products also went up for oil companies in India.
They raised petrol and diesel prices by Rs 10 a litre in just over a fortnight beginning March 22 but hit a pause button soon after as the move faced criticism and the opposition parties asked the government to cut taxes instead.
India imports most of its oil from a group of countries called the ‘OPEC +’ (i.e, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Russia, etc), which produces 40% of the world’s crude oil.
As they have the power to dictate fuel supply and prices, their decision of limiting the global supply reduces supply in India, thus raising prices
The government charges about 167% tax (excise) on petrol and 129% on diesel as compared to US (20%), UK (62%), Italy and Germany (65%).
The abominable excise duty is 2/3rd of the cost, and the base price, dealer commission and freight form the rest.
Here is an approximate break-up (in Rs):
a)Base Price | 39 |
b)Freight | 0.34 |
c) Price Charged to Dealers = (a+b) | 39.34 |
d) Excise Duty | 40.17 |
e) Dealer Commission | 4.68 |
f) VAT | 25.35 |
g) Retail Selling Price | 109.54 |
Looked closely, much of the cost of petrol and diesel is due to higher tax rate by govt, specifically excise duty.
So the question is why government is not reducing the prices ?
India, being a developing country, it does require gigantic amount of funding for its infrastructure projects as well as welfare schemes.
However, we as a society is yet to be tax-compliant. Many people evade the direct tax and that’s the reason why govt’s hands are tied. Govt. needs the money to fund various programs and at the same time it is not generating enough revenue from direct taxes.
That’s the reason why, govt is bumping up its revenue through higher indirect taxes such as GST or excise duty as in the case of petrol and diesel.
Direct taxes are progressive as it taxes according to an individuals’ income however indirect tax such as excise duty or GST are regressive in the sense that the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich have to pay the same amount.
Does not matter, if you are an auto-driver or owner of a Mercedes, end of the day both pay the same price for petrol/diesel-that’s why it is regressive in nature.
But unlike direct tax where tax evasion is rampant, indirect tax can not be evaded due to their very nature and as long as huge no of Indians keep evading direct taxes, indirect tax such as excise duty will be difficult for the govt to reduce, because it may reduce the revenue and hamper may programs of the govt.
Globally, around 80% of wastewater flows back into the ecosystem without being treated or reused, according to the United Nations.
This can pose a significant environmental and health threat.
In the absence of cost-effective, sustainable, disruptive water management solutions, about 70% of sewage is discharged untreated into India’s water bodies.
A staggering 21% of diseases are caused by contaminated water in India, according to the World Bank, and one in five children die before their fifth birthday because of poor sanitation and hygiene conditions, according to Startup India.
As we confront these public health challenges emerging out of environmental concerns, expanding the scope of public health/environmental engineering science becomes pivotal.
For India to achieve its sustainable development goals of clean water and sanitation and to address the growing demands for water consumption and preservation of both surface water bodies and groundwater resources, it is essential to find and implement innovative ways of treating wastewater.
It is in this context why the specialised cadre of public health engineers, also known as sanitation engineers or environmental engineers, is best suited to provide the growing urban and rural water supply and to manage solid waste and wastewater.
Traditionally, engineering and public health have been understood as different fields.
Currently in India, civil engineering incorporates a course or two on environmental engineering for students to learn about wastewater management as a part of their pre-service and in-service training.
Most often, civil engineers do not have adequate skills to address public health problems. And public health professionals do not have adequate engineering skills.
India aims to supply 55 litres of water per person per day by 2024 under its Jal Jeevan Mission to install functional household tap connections.
The goal of reaching every rural household with functional tap water can be achieved in a sustainable and resilient manner only if the cadre of public health engineers is expanded and strengthened.
In India, public health engineering is executed by the Public Works Department or by health officials.
This differs from international trends. To manage a wastewater treatment plant in Europe, for example, a candidate must specialise in wastewater engineering.
Furthermore, public health engineering should be developed as an interdisciplinary field. Engineers can significantly contribute to public health in defining what is possible, identifying limitations, and shaping workable solutions with a problem-solving approach.
Similarly, public health professionals can contribute to engineering through well-researched understanding of health issues, measured risks and how course correction can be initiated.
Once both meet, a public health engineer can identify a health risk, work on developing concrete solutions such as new health and safety practices or specialised equipment, in order to correct the safety concern..
There is no doubt that the majority of diseases are water-related, transmitted through consumption of contaminated water, vectors breeding in stagnated water, or lack of adequate quantity of good quality water for proper personal hygiene.
Diseases cannot be contained unless we provide good quality and adequate quantity of water. Most of the world’s diseases can be prevented by considering this.
Training our young minds towards creating sustainable water management systems would be the first step.
Currently, institutions like the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (IIT-M) are considering initiating public health engineering as a separate discipline.
To leverage this opportunity even further, India needs to scale up in the same direction.