<b>ADDING UP INDIA</b>

Planning for Industrialisation, Bhagwati and Srinivasan’s 1975 Foreign Trade Regimes, and Vijay Joshi and I.M.D. Little’s 1994 Macroeconomics and the Political Economy. Bhagwati and Srinivasan and Joshi and Little weren’t the same. I think Panagariya has written a 2008 version of Bhagwati and Desai. That’s a book that needed to be written, by someone with sufficient knowledge and perseverance.
The first head of growth and economic reforms divides India’s transition into four stages — the takeoff under a liberal regime (1961-65), socialism striking with a vengeance (1965-81), liberalisation by stealth (1981-88) and the triumph of liberalisation (1988-2006). “The reform process picked up in a major way once again under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, especially after the 1999 elections returned his National Democratic Alliance (NDA) with a clear parliamentary majority…. But the resolve within the UPA to move the reforms forward has also been at best weak.… Once the UPA publicly embraced the view that the reforms had not helped the poor, its ability to push the same reforms was greatly undercut.” Panagariya is unabashedly pro-reform and as the discussion under the head of poverty, inequality and economic reforms makes clear, the case is also that reforms are good for poverty alleviation.

This book has several other USPs that need flagging. The average economist isn’t always conversant with the law and fails to recognise legal damage during the state-intervention era and remaining legal constraints. This book is an exception, and there is thus explicit recognition of excesses from the mid-1960s to the late ’70s. Also, such books often tend to be too macro. While the macro stuff is there (under the heads of macroeconomics and transforming India), the micro stuff pervades the discussion under the Government head, such as the papers on health, water supply, sanitation and education. “I also hope that those who disagree will learn enough from the book to draw their own informed conclusions.”

This is a book that will be treasured and quoted, like Bhagwati and Desai’s in an earlier era. However, is this volume for an economist or a non-economist? The answer is, both. Given the non-economist audience, the book should probably have had some kind of conclusion or epilogue. It ends abruptly with education. While the introduction is excellent, it isn’t a substitute for a concluding message.

Ads By Google

Message*	Maximum characters allowed

Name*		Email ID*
Subject*		Country*

TERMS OF USE:
The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).

I agree to the terms of use.

Mail this page