|
|
|
Is
Indian Industry Shining? |
|
|
|
The
deliberate adoption of a myopic vision is writ large
in the India Shining campaign, with its principal focus
on a successful, urban, middle India. This effort to
manipulate perspective is revealed in the use of figures
of economic performance in a single year or a couple
of selectively chosen ones to cloud events of even the
immediate past. It is reflected in the tendency to emphasise
and elevate the double effect of speculative FII inflows
in sharply increasing India's foreign exchange reserves
position on the one hand, and triggering a boom (however
volatile) in India's stock market on the other, while
ignoring the poor performance of the commodity producing
sectors. It is seen in the effort to celebrate new,
and yet marginal, trends in employment while downplaying
the devastation that poor agricultural labourers and
small farmers must have faced because of the drought
in 2002-03, whose effects on production was far more
severe than any prediction - official or otherwise.
A typical example of such new trends is the rapid rise,
albeit from a small base, in employment and revenues
from IT-enabled services like call centres, that have
reportedly generated jobs for around 1,70,000-2,00,000
young Indians.
The effects of this myopic vision are seen in the approach
to all sectors of the economy. Consider, for example,
industry. Conventionally urban prosperity was linked
to the advance of a dynamic industrial sector. Unfortunately,
going by the figures on the Index of Industrial Production,
industrial growth was at an unremarkable 6.3 per cent
during the first nine months of so-called boom year
2003-04, when agricultural production shot back from
its 2002-03 trough. |
|
|
|
During
the peak of the liberalization and reform euphoria in
1994-95 and 1995-96, respectively, industrial growth
was at 9.1 and 13 per cent respectively, well before
the NDA's magic ostensibly began to transform this country.
The lack of dynamism that this decline in industrial
growth since the early mid-1990s reflects is all the
more disturbing because it combines with an overall
stagnation in the investment rate in a country that
is supposedly on the move and is the darling of foreign
investors. |
|
|
|
As Chart 2
indicates, after rising in the first half of the
1990s to touch a peak of 27.3 per cent in 1995-96,
the rate of capital formation in the economy has
remained well below that level in all but one of
the subsequent years. This decline and subsequent
stagnation in investment occurs despite the visible
signs of movement, in sectors like telecom and more
recently in highway construction - sectors
that the Prime Minister has identified as epitomising
the direction the rest of India should take. What
he missed out was the fact that investment in these
sectors, at whatever rates they are actually occurring,
failed to pull along investment in the rest of the
economy. Conventionally, through its effects on
profits and utilisation in the rest of the economy,
future investment is triggered elsewhere. This,
Shining India has not been able to ensure. Clearly,
if investment is not buoyant, an economy could not
be. Seen from the angle of vision of the principal
commodity producing sector, what is happening is
that the early gloss is fading under the NDA.
The lack of investment has been accompanied by dismal
trends in employment over the 1990s, despite the
Planning Commission's propagandist claims of the
government having "created" 84 lakh jobs
every year over the last years. This intriguing
claim, it now appears, is based on a comparison
of the "usual status" workforce figures
yielded by two NSS surveys relating to July-June
2000 and July-December 2002, which have as their
mid-points the two dates (1 January 2000 and 1 October
2002) that provide the 33-month period for which
the claim is being made. As Prof. K. Sundaram from
the Delhi School of Economics has pointed out (Economic
Times, 14 February 2004), there are a number of
problems with using these surveys for such short
term comparisons. Thus, the NSS surveys seem to
suggest that employment increased by 76 lakh (not
84 lakh as claimed) in the 33-month period between
1 January 2000 and 1 October 2002, 68 lakh in the
21-month between 1 January 2001 and 1 October 2002,
and 300 lakh in the 24-month period between 1 January
2000 and 1 January 2002, while it declined by 90
lakh in the 9-month between 1 January 2002 and 1
October 2002. If the last of these is used as the
basis for judgement, Indian is clearly not shining
more recently. Given the specific focus of each
round of the NSS, using the figures yielded for
such short term comparisons may not be the best
way to assess increases (or decreases) in absolute
employment.
But that this is not all. Even if we stick by the
two surveys and the two time points used by the
Planning Commission in its advertisement, which
claims that in the last three years "we"
are getting close to achieving the Prime Minister's
target of providing one crore new employment opportunities
every year, the evidence on "whose India is
shining" is quite damaging. First, urban areas
which account for 23 per cent of the workforce account
for 40 per cent of the increase in "employment
opportunities" during the 33-month period.
Second, the number of women workers in the country
declined by 15 lakh or around 5 lakh per annum.
Third, this decline in the case of women in rural
areas amounted to close to 10 lakh per annum. Fourth,
the number of women workers in the 15-34 age group
declined by 17 lakh per annum. Finally, the share
of all those in the 15-34 age group (who feature
prominently in the India Shining campaign) in the
new employment opportunities claimed to have been
created amounted to just 25 per cent, whereas those
aged '60 and above' accounted for around 17 per
cent. Once we take note of these figures, little
needs to be said about the dismal "quality"
of the "employment opportunities" that
the government claims to have created.
These trends, in output, investment and employment
are indeed surprising given the fact that this has
been the period when huge concessions and tax benefits
have been handed out to India's corporate sector
with the aim of reviving the animal spirits of India's
dormant monopoly groups and kick-starting investment.
The spur to industry does not stop there. It also
comes from the consumption and housing finance boom
that has been spurred by the reckless lending at
declining interest rates that financial liberalisation
has resulted in. According to reports on a study
undertaken by KSA Technopak, personal credit outstanding
in the country rose by 300 per cent from Rs. 40,000
crores in 2000 to Rs.1,60,000 crores in 2003 and
is still growing. Though this still accounts for
only 12-14 per cent of aggregate consumption spending
in the country, its concentration among the "middle
class", especially in urban India, would imply
that there is a growing credit overhang that is
based on excessive exposure to a small section of
the population. These are also the sections which
are being provided large volumes of housing finance
at low nominal interest rates by financial firms
desperate to find vents for the liquidity that they
can access. The Reserve Bank of India has already
warned housing finance companies about the high
risk portfolio that many of them are carrying.
This credit boom may be increasing fragility in
India's increasingly liberalised financial sector.
But it is also helping along sales volumes in corporate
India and holding up profits. The problem however
is that having bought earlier versions of the India
Shining campaign, corporate India has created so
much excess capacity in many areas that the increases
in demand only go to increase utilisation of already
created capacities, and has not helped spur investment
in recent times.
However, combined with the concessions that have
been handed out to the private sector that we referred
to earlier, these trends have indeed helped the
corporate sector declare reasonably high profits.
This is one more recent trend that provides the
gloss for India's shine. Those profits and the fact
that India is the flavour of the season for foreign
institutional investors have provided the basis
for a spurt of speculation in the stock markets
taking the Sensex to new temporal highs, even if
this is accompanied by substantial volatility. Therefore,
the Sensex has become one more barometer for a government
in search of the shine that is constantly rendered
murky by visible signs of poverty.
That search has been successful also because of
another consequence of the stock market rush: the
surge of FII investments in the country that have
contributed substantially to the sharp and sudden
increase in the size of India's foreign exchange
reserves. Having crossed the $100 billion mark,
those reserves have become a source of embarrassment
and a problem for the government. Embarrassment
because those reserves, which arise because of RBI
purchases of foreign exchange to prevent the rupee
from appreciating and affecting India's export competitiveness
adversely, are now being cited as evidence of the
fact that the rupee is "undervalued".
Revalue the rupee, the US argues, so that imports
are not discriminated against in the Indian market.
The reserves are also a problem because, while the
inflows that deliver them earn high returns that
can be repatriated in foreign exchange, their investment
abroad yields the country a less than 3 per cent
average return. This implies that the country is
paying a high price in foreign exchange in order
to accumulate and maintain such reserves. To boot,
the inflows that contribute these reserves are in
the nature of "hot money" flows. If and
when foreign investors begin to suspect that the
shine was never there, there could be a rush of
investment out of the country. Since the government,
egged on by the reserves, has decided to encourage
profligate foreign exchange spending and investments
abroad by ordinary citizens who have the wherewithal,
any such exit would soon turn into an exodus, precipitating
a financial crisis of a kind that the world is all
too familiar with.
Unwarranted claims in all these areas is sought
to be strengthened by figures of recent performance.
But even here the lie is hard to sell. It is indeed
true that growth this year in agriculture has been
remarkable. But that clearly is because of the bad
monsoon-induced collapse of agricultural output
that makes a return to output levels achieved in
2001-02 deliver a remarkable growth rate. It is
true that the recovery in agriculture combined with
a credit-driven spending boom has helped industrial
growth along. But that growth is far short of what
the advocates of liberalisation promised to deliver
and did manage to do so for a brief period in the
mid-1990s when the NDA was yet to take power. It
is true that the software and IT-enabled services
sector is witnessing high rates of growth of revenues,
exports and employment. But that occurs on a low
base in a sector which remains an enclave and cannot
compensate for the slow growth in the commodity
producing sectors. It is also true that India's
foreign exchange reserve position, its stock markets
and its financial sector are buoyant. But all that
also reflects the fragility that underlies the kind
of jobless growth process that the NDA government
has unleashed during its tenure.
Why is the government choosing to manipulate the
nation's vision by behaving as if what it says is
true? It should be obvious that the real intent
of the India Shining slogan is to conceal the poor
performance of the commodity producing sectors and
the fragility of much else of the economy. If India's
economy is shining, that shine is similar to the
light reflected off an overblown bubble. The coming
election, therefore, is also one that would decide
who would pick up the pieces when that bubble does
burst.
February 21, 2004.
|
|
|