India is a huge country, its people having contributed
significantly to many fields of human endeavour, not least to the
theatre of the human mind. These achievements have done us as a people
proud.
Given this background, can be any
justification for blowing up differences in opinion between two
brilliant Indian economists, Amartya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati, who have
made their mark in their specialised areas of economic thought and
analysis?
Distortions in perception
The
Indian media is responsible for, first, making icons of people who are
really just one among many such “icons” on the national and
international scenes and, secondly, of milking situations in which the
icons find themselves — leading to distortions in the perception of what
should make news and what should not.
Both Bhagwati
and Sen have built up a corpus of work on economic development, the
former focusing on growth, the latter on “social integration” which
would make the “growth” meaningful in any society. This reminds one of
the growth-versus-distribution divide of the past. In Sen’s view,
special emphasis has to be put on sectors such as education and
healthcare if “growth” is to carry any real meaning for the people.
Bhagwati’s view is that anti-poverty programmes actually increase
poverty; growth is the best anti-poverty antidote.
Incapable of delivery
Sixty
years of Independence have made it crystal clear that Indian
administration is simply not capable of delivering results in fields
such as education and healthcare, which will make a material difference
to the future “growth” of the country. Even if funds are allocated to
these two sectors on a substantial scale by policymakers — which is
unavoidable given the huge scale of task in hand — there is no guarantee
that implementation of the projects concerned will be done in the right
way so that every rupee spent makes it mark at the ground level.
A very basic assumption is that “leakage” of funds is kept to a minimum, a sine qua non
of the entire exercise, in view of the overall scarcity of resources of
the Indian exchequer — which, however, is a difficult one to make,
going by prevailing trends. Corruption is on the rise everywhere, and
there are no indications of the trend being reversed, or even halted.
It
is true that a couple of States, such as Kerala, may have made some
“progress” , but they probably form the exception to the general rule in
the country, which is quite disheartening.
The
unsatisfactory state of the nation’s politics and the plummeting quality
of its administration point to the feasibility of the Bhagwati model of
economic development -- more growth and less social welfare; poverty
will take care of itself -- in Indian conditions, which is marked by a
strong trickle-down element. Sen’s view requires effective State
intervention, the availability of which is becoming increasingly
questionable.
No comments:
Post a Comment