 |
India’s democracy has long been one of the wonders of the world. This country
of more than 1 billion people—most of whom are poor and lack a formal education,
and over two-thirds of whom live in the countryside—has sustained, since its
independence in 1947, a robust, sometimes tumultuous political tradition. By
contrast, India’s economy has been something of a cabinet of curiosities, where
extreme opposites jostle side by side. A lumbering state-controlled sector,
still directed by five-year plans, coexists with some of the world’s most
dynamic high-tech companies and scientific research centers. The consuming
aspirations of an exuberant middle class are fed by nimble private
entrepreneurs, while some 300 million others live on less than $1 a day.
| Investors, particularly those with short attention spans, should certainly approach India cautiously, and brace for political
surprises. These undulations are an authentic expression of a
uniquely complex society. | The results of the general elections in May—in which the opposition Congress
Party defeated the governing coalition, led by a Hindu nationalist party—testify
to the intricacy of this massive cociopolitical enterprise. It was a dazzling
affirmation of the political freedoms that Indians possess, but also raised
questions about the direction and character of India’s economic future. The
markets greeted the Congress Party’s return to power, after eight years in
opposition, nervously, interpreting the result as a mandate against the program
of economic reforms that India has gradually pursued since 1991. Investors who
had once piled in enthusiastically now withdrew, fearful that the new government
and the communist parties on whose support it relied might slow or even stop
liberalization. However, those who reacted this way misread both the immediate
situation as well as India’s deeper trends.
Investors, particularly those
with short attention spans, should certainly approach India cautiously, and
brace for political surprises. These undulations are an authentic expression of
a uniquely complex society, whose economy varies sharply between regions and
sectors. India’s most prosperous state, Punjab, boasts a per capita income five
times higher than the poorest one, Bihar, while communist-governed Kerala’s 94
percent literacy rate contrasts with that of just 38 percent in Bihar. Such
disparities, in a federal system of 28 states xperiencing rapid and uneven
social change and where expectations are rising fast, are a recipe for political
volatility—and will from time to time find voice in populist parties and
programs.
Pragmatic Accord Despite this, India’s economic reform process is
irreversible, based as it is on a consensus that extends across all political
parties. Although some raised the specter of a swing back to the era of state
control—the license-permit Raj—India’s pragmatic economic tradition renders such
worries baseless. Even in West Bengal, where communists have governed since the
1970s, companies like IBM have recently been welcomed with special provisions.
(For example, the government insulates the software industry from labor
strikes.)
| In a paper published last year, Goldman Sachs estimated that India’s
economy could be larger than Japan’s by 2032, and by midcentury,
per capita income will have increased 35 fold. | Further, the new prime minister, Manmohan Singh, inherits not just
a healthy economy, but one that he did much to create. A professional economist
with an Oxford PhD, Singh was last inducted into office as finance minister
during India’s worst economic crisis, in 1991, when the country found itself
with just two week’s worth of foreign exchange reserves. In 2004 he takes charge
of a treasury with foreign exchange reserves nearing a record $120 billion. GDP
growth in the first quarter of 2004 surpassed 10 percent, and it may be as high
as 8 percent for the year. India’s skilled service sector, spearheaded by its
software industry (which grew by 30 percent last year), continues to consternate
the developed economies.
Deeper trends underpin this recent bounty. India has
decisively pulled itself out of a decades-long economic waddle, which yielded
steady but modest expansion of around 3.5 percent a year—famously dubbed the
“Hindu rate of growth.” Since the 1980s, annual growth has averaged around 6
percent, and the 1990s saw the fastest growth in India’s recorded history.
Poorer, late-developing countries have the potential to catch up rapidly. In a
paper published last year, Goldman Sachs estimated that India’s economy could be
larger than Japan’s by 2032, and by midcentury, per capita income will have
increased 35 fold.
The fundamental resource that will drive India’s
economic rise is its people. By 2050, India will surpass China as the world’s
most populous nation, and its citizenry is increasingly youthful. India is only
just beginning to experience what Japan, Western Europe and the United States
have already passed through: a youth bulge. In these economies, and in those of
East Asia, the working population is declining as people age.
The country’s
class of talented private entrepreneurs is only beginning to tap India’s large,
youthful and poor labor pool. Many indigenous start-ups have grown into global
success stories. The best known are software companies like Wipro and Infosys,
but they are also to be found in pharmaceuticals—Ranbaxy, Dr. Reddy and Cipla—as
well as in more traditional sectors such as automotive parts and steel. These
companies, which raise money from India’s developed capital markets and benefit
from low interest rates, are now looking to invest beyond its borders. Indian
business has thrived in this more competitive atmosphere since the 1990s. In an
important analysis of India’s recent growth, Dani Rodrik, of Harvard, and Arvind
Subramanian, of the International Monetary Fund, have shown that much of this
success was the result of more efficient use of resources, men and machines. The
productivity that is driving Indian growth over the past two decades is close to
the highest in the world.Policy Pitfalls India’s current push for growth
will come up against significant barriers if it cannot finesse its main foreign
policy challenge. South Asia is today the least integrated of all Asia’s
regions, with minuscule levels of cross-border trade among its seven countries.
The greatest obstacle to closer integration and higher growth is the almost
60-year conflict with Pakistan over the state of Kashmir, a dangerous face-off
between two nuclear powers. The new Indian government has committed itself to
furthering the peace process, but much will depend on how Pakistan responds.
Both sides need to recognize that high economic stakes trump narrow issues of
sovereignty. The South Asia market contains 1.4 billion people, and the
different national economies complement each other in significant ways. When it
finally emerges as an integrated economic region, India will be its economic
engine, and the rewards of growth will be plentiful.
Domestically, India’s
fiscal management has typically been prudent, and committed to economic
stability. Unlike many other developing economies, India has never had extended
periods of high inflation, because governments have not resorted to printing
money to get themselves out of trouble. Yet the managers of India’s public
finances now face a major task in taming the country’s fiscal deficit, which
amounts to roughly 10 percent of GDP, and slows growth by swallowing a large
chunk of India’s private savings.
More than 40 percent of the government’s
recurring expenses involve servicing past borrowings, and much of the remaining
revenue pays for salaries, defense and subsidies. Cutting the deficit is
difficult because subsidies have hardened into a fixture of the country’s
political economy. Free electrical power and fertilizers are used to buy off
prosperous farmers, while tax breaks and preferential savings rates keep
middle-class voters smiling. Governments have shied away from confronting these
powerful electoral groups, and the new one is likely to try to address the
deficit by improving tax revenues—which at present are only 14 percent of
GDP.
Within these constraints, very little is left for social spending on
education or health, and on physical infrastructure. Because of this, India will
need to hand off the financing and development of power, transport and airports
to the private sector. (India’s mobile telephony market, which is the fastest
growing in the world and is projected to reach 100 million subscribers by 2010,
is an outstanding example of the success of such a strategy.)
Colonial Memories Indigenous capital has financed most of India’s growth
so far; the country sees barely one-tenth of the $50 billion direct foreign
investment that China sees every year. However, foreign investors who want the
sort of freedom from regulations they enjoy in China’s special economic zones,
or to extract massive profits, will be disappointed. Exploitive projects like
Enron’s power plant at Dabhol, accused of having a distorted pricing scheme,
will run into popular opposition that draws on India’s colonial experience, as
well as its democratic traditions.
India needs jobs above all. Its service
sector, with its software flagship, now accounts for half of India’s GDP. But
the software industry employs fewer than a million Indians, from a labor pool of
470 million, to which 9 million are added every year. Agriculture (which
accounts for less than a quarter of GDP) and industry have been painfully slow
to grow. As a result, the economy is creating less than half the number of jobs
it needs each year, leaving around 5 million more youths without prospects.
Growth and modernization inevitably bring social strains in their wake, and
India may face more than its expected share unless it can spread the benefits of
that growth by expanding employment opportunities.
Over the past six decades,
India has invested consistently in its political and legal systems, and has
accumulated considerable institutional capital to deal with problems of
social development—something that again sets it apart from China. Democracy and
its institutions provide India with powerful mechanisms of learning and
self-correction. These mechanisms, for all their flaws, are more stable (because
they are more supple) than those of solid-seeming China. India’s more
gradualist, consensus-building path to liberalization should thus ensure a more
durable basis for growth within a diverse society. The new Indian government
seems poised to demonstrate that even in a country of unprecedented complexity, political freedom and sustainable economic growth may
coexist.
Sunil Khilnani is the author of The Idea of India and director, South
Asia Studies, at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International
Studies in Washington, D.C. |