|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Future of India: Economics, Politics and
Governance
While Bimal Jalan shares the optimism of many about India’s potential in the knowledge sector, he is "not at all confident that we will be able to fully seize the opportunities that are now available." The factors that may impede India’s progress are "the deadweight of the past, the power of distributional coalitions, and the growing disjuncture between economics and politics." India is a land of bewildering dualisms. It remained a vibrant democracy even though it was mired in poverty and had to "practically beg for food aid from the US." More significantly, it proved wrong the numerous prophets of doom who had contemptuously dismissed India as a land of a "million mutinies". Even while India was facing the worst economic crisis, it enjoyed immense moral stature in the comity of nations. Today, when India has become the fourth largest economy in PPP terms, it is not left with many friends in the developing world. Perhaps this dualism itself is India’s greatest asset. Jalan’s prognostication has failed to reckon this factor. Of course he has sought to partly answer this dichotomy. He says, "The real answer to the puzzle about India’s high growth combined with persistent poverty lies in what can be perhaps described as the growing ‘public-private’ dichotomy in our economic life." That is primarily an economist’s diagnosis. Jalan notes in the Preface that this book is "different in tone and content" from his previous books, which dealt primarily with economic policy issues. Not only his diagnosis of the malaise afflicting Indian polity and economy by no means new, his prescription too is familiar. It is the interplay of politics, economics and governance, he says, which will "jointly determine the future of India." Besides being a notable banker and an economist, Jalan has held top positions in government. He was Chairman of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister and Governor of the Reserve Bank of India. Hence, he has the insight into the functioning of key ministries. Jalan’s prescriptions for the many ills plaguing the nation are quite radical. Some of the reforms suggested by him to overcome the crisis of governance would require an altogether different political culture. For example, he refers to the need for a joint agreement between leaders of major political parties and trade unions to improve public services. He recommends holding government employees responsible for their performance and making the government more responsive to the needs of citizens. His suggestion that no party with less than 10 percent of seats in the Lok Sabha should be part of the government unless it "drops its separate identity as a party at the Centre and joins the main party in a coalition as an associate or an affiliate member until the next elections" is utopian, to say the least. India has entered an era of coalitions, and smaller parties have become big stakeholders. It is true that "distributional coalitions" have their follies, but coalitions are here to stay. Jalan’s suggestion to replace the doctrine of "collective" responsibility of the government by the notion of "individual" responsibility of ministers merits serious consideration. No one will disagree with him that "corruption is a major cause of economic backwardness, low growth, high incidence of poverty and fiscal crisis." The need for institutional reform is therefore imperative. In a way, India defies any model and its success of high growth with a flourishing democracy is not easy to replicate. India will surge ahead in spite of its dualisms and dichotomies. It is this genius of India which makes it a class apart. In any event, as Jalan quotes Amartya Sen, democracy is its own reward and the benefits of democracy cannot be judged solely in terms of its contribution to growth. What is, however, imperative is the need for eternal vigilance. It is this vigilance that Jalan’s book talks so eloquently about. |
A