This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
“IMPACT OF LIBERALISATION ON INDIA”
SUBMITTED BY: SOURABH VERDIA(523)
Contents: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Acknowledgment Introduction Pre-liberalisation Liberalisation Economic liberalisation & its policies in India Types of liberalisation Foreign Direct Investment Reforms in agriculture & infrastructure Privatization Globalization Conclusion
We would like to express our gratitude to all those who gave us the possibility to complete this report on ‘Effects of Liberalisation on India’ . We want to thank Dr Ashok Panigrahi for giving us the opportunity to explore our knowledge in the field of business economics under his guidance.
The objective of liberalisation is to induct competitive-forces into the economy. More specifically, liberalised industrial policies are targeted to increase competition and to obtain efficient outcomes in industry. In a world without market imperfections and externalities, liberalised markets would lead to a first-best Pareto optimal situation. But in a second-best world of imperfections, it becomes important to trace the implications of these liberalisation policies. Liberal industrial policies can have competitive outcomes only in the absence of entry barriers. Liberalisation policies remove artificial barriers to entry by new firms, and allow capacity expansion of incumbent firms. However,the existence of natural barriers indicates imperfect competition as reflected in the industry. Economic liberalization of India means the process of opening up of the Indian ecomony to trade and investment with the rest of the world. Till 1991 India had a import protection policy wherein trade with the rest of the world was limited to exports. Foriegn invetment was very difficult to come into India due to a bureaucratic framework. After the start of the economic liberalization, India started getting huge capital inflows and it has emerged as the 2nd fastest growing country in the world. The economic liberalisation in India refers to ongoing economic reforms in India that started on 24 July 1991. After Independence in 1947, India adhered to socialist policies. Attempts were made to liberalize economy in 1966 and 1985. The first attempt was reversed in 1967. Thereafter, a stronger version of socialism was adopted. Second major attempt was in 1985 by the then Prime Minister Mr. Rajiv Gandhi/Rajeev Gandhi. The process came to a halt in 1987, though 1966 style reversal did not take place. In 1991, after India faced a balance of payments crisis, it had to pledge 20 tons of gold to Union Bank of Switzerland and 47 tons to Bank of England as part of a bailout deal with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In addition, IMF required India to undertake a series of structural economic reforms. As a result of this requirement, the government of P. V. Narasimha Rao and his finance minister Manmohan Singh (currently the Prime Minister of India) started breakthrough reforms, although they did not implement many of the reforms IMF wanted. The new neo-liberal policies included opening for international trade and investment, deregulation, initiation of privatization, tax reforms, and inflation-controlling measures. The overall direction of liberalisation has since remained the same, irrespective of the ruling party, although no party has yet tried to take on powerful lobbies such as the trade unions and farmers, or contentious issues such as reforming labour laws and reducing agricultural subsidies.Thus, unlike the reforms of 1966 and 1985 that were carried out by the majority Congress governments, the reforms of 1991 carried out by a minority government proved sustainable world.
The fruits of liberalisation reached their peak in 2007, when India recorded its highest GDP growth rate of 9%. With this, India became the second fastest growing major economy in the world, next only to China. The growth rate has slowed significantly in the first half of 2012 . An Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report states that the average growth rate 7.5% will double the average income in a decade, and more reforms would speed up the pace. Indian government coalitions have been advised to continue liberalisation. India grows at slower pace than China, which has been liberalising its economy since 1978. The McKinsey Quarterlystates that removing main obstacles "would free India’s economy to grow as fast as China’s, at 10 percent a year". There has been significant debate, however, around liberalization as an inclusive economic growth strategy. Since 1992, income inequality has deepened in India with consumption among the poorest staying stable while the wealthiest generate consumption growth . For 2010, India was ranked 124th among 179 countries in Index of Economic Freedom World Rankings, which is an improvement from the preceding year.
The Pre-liberalization Era – Prior to 1991 The Post Liberalization Era -- The Present Era
India has been following a highly protective industrial and foreign trade regime since 1951. The protective regime controlled not only entry into industry and capacity expansion but also technology, output mix and import content. Due to high tariffs before the liberalization period, most Indians firms enjoyed protection of some kind or the other. Free imports were not forthcoming. Before the process of reform began in 1991, the government attempted to close the Indian economy to the outside world. The Indian currency, the rupee, was inconvertible and high tariffs and import licensing prevented foreign goods reaching the market. Manufacturers had a field day as this situation continued for a long time, leading to the creation of artificial scarcity even for basic items. The liberalisation of Indian economy started gradually in the 1980's and major economic liberalisations (structural adjustment programs) began from 1991. Due to the policies of Indian government:
India had “A Balance of Payments” crisis in 1991 which pushed the country to near bankruptcy. With India’s foreign exchange reserves at $1.2 billion in January 1991 and depleted by half by June, barely enough to last for roughly 3 weeks of essential imports, India was only weeks way from defaulting on its external balance of payment obligations. The caretaker government in India headed by Prime Minister Chandra Sekhar’s, immediate response was to secure an emergency loan of $2.2 billion from the International Monetary Fund by pledging 67 tons of India's gold reserves as collateral.The Reserve Bank of India had to airlift 47 tons of gold to the Bank of England and 20 tons of gold to the Union Bank of Switzerland to raise $600 million The Rupee devalued and economic reforms were forced upon India. India central bank had refused new credit and foreign exchange reserves had reduced to the point that India could barely finance three weeks worth of imports . No FDI & FII Investments.
What did government do?
Dr Manmohan Singh(the current PM) suggested that if India had to progress, its economic policies must be reformed as per changing times and decided to introduce the concept liberalisation india .
In general, liberalisation refers to a relaxation of previous government restrictions, usually in areas of social or economic policy.It refers to loosening or removal of controls so that economic development gets encouragement. It includes abolition of those economic policies,rules, regulations, administrative controls and procedures which impede economic development.In other words economic liberalisation is a new economy policy of promoting market determine determined economic decisions rather than bureaucratic arbitrary economic decisions.
Economic liberalisation in india The economic liberalisation in India refers to ongoing economic reforms in India that started on 24 July 1991 and are still being followed. Attempts were made to liberalize economy in 1966 and 1985. And finally in 1991, after India faced a balance of payments crisis ,new economic policies were introduced leading to economic liberalisation of india.
The Policies of Liberalization Included the Following: Opening the Gate for International Trade and Investment. Deregulation (The removal of government controls from an industry or sector, to allow for a free and efficient marketplace). Freedom for expansion and production. Increase in the investment limit of the small industries. Tax Reforms. Initiation of Privatization. Inflation Controlling Measure Freedom to import capital goods and technology. Government liberalisation policies have been structured toRevitalize Indian industry by infusing it with a greater degree of competition. As opposed to earlier policies which directed investment in industry to what were understood to be 'nationally desirous' in a protected environment, liberalisation allows a manufacturer greater liberty in selecting investment levels and output patterns according to the dictates of the market. Liberalisation, by systematically deregulating industry and cutting down restrictions on trade (especially imports), aims at infusing greater competition into the industrial sector and thereby increasing growth and efficiency. Liberalisation policies in India had a modest beginning in the late 1960s to remedy the foreign exchange and fiscal problems faced by the economy. The relative merit of the market as opposed to state directed development began gaining support onaccount of three problems facing the economy from the late 1960s.The first was the prolonged stagnation in the industrial sector .
Liberalisation of industrial and trade policies will improve industrial efficiency by: (a) providing greater access to imported intermediate inputs , capital goods and technology: (b) exposing domestic producers to competition, external and internal, and thereby force them to reduce costs, and (c) lifting the growth and size of firms so as to exploit scale economies. Improvement in efficiency and the resultant reduction in costs will stimulate domestic demand and enable India's industrial products to compete abroad, thereby relaxing demand-side constraints on industrial growth." C Goldar 1990:603^ Until 1991 there was no one official policy statement setting out explicitly what the new economic policy was and what it intended to achieve. The novelty of the policy was perceived only when
changes in policy and procedures relating to industrial licensing, exchange rate policy, import policy along with some observations about the need for rationalising and simplifying the systems of fiscal and administrative procedures were pieced together, (policies that are directed at the industrial sector can be classified into two categories: (a)domestic,.Iiberaiisation and (b) trade liberalisation. This distinction is made because in the Indian context these two have not been implemented in tandem.Domestic liberalisation not only pre-dates trade liberalization but has been more systematic.
Domestic; liberalisation policies sought to redefine the contours o-f the state and market in -favour of the market in the domestic sphere of economic activity. These policies were aimed at deregulation and privatisation. To translate these objectives into policy terms, the government formulated the following measures to facilitate capacity and output expansion and to remove procedural impediments to investment and growth of firms. Delicensing: A number of industries (apart from the small-scale sector) were progressively delicensed by the time the New Licensing Industrial Policy CNILP3 was enunciated in 1991. NILP delicensed all industries irrespective of size of investment or the ownership of the undertaking except 18industries which still required licensing. The number of industries was later reduced to 15.Broadband!ng: Diversification in specified industries was permitted without obtaining an industrial license, initially subject to the condition that the firm did not come "under the purview of Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices CMRTP3 Act & Foreign Exchange Regulations Act EFERA3. This policy was designed to introduce some flexibility into the licensing mechanism and to enable manufacturers to utilize their capacities more efficiently and fine tune their product mix in response to market demand. This scheme commenced with the machine tools industry in 1983, and the list grew steadily. In August 1988, the government announced that the broadband mg facility would be available for companies that came under the purview of the MRTP and FERA in Appendix A. and would be subject to export obligations in respect of non— Appendix A companies. This policy measure lost its relevance due to the liberalised licensing policy in the NILP C19913.Re-endctrsement al' Capacity: Licensed capacity in selected industries was increased by an additional 257. over and above the highest production level achieved during the previous five years. Also, automatic growth was allowed. This policy became redundant after the NILP C19913 when licensing was limited to a small list of industries. Minimum Economic Scale: Minimum capacities of operation were prescribed in select industries in order to exploit economies of scale. This was with a view to increase efficiency in units that could not exploit scale, economies because of the stringent licensing laws. As on February1990, 106 products in 14 broad industrial groups had a prescribed minimum economic scale of operation. Opening up the Public Sector: Areas that were earlier under the exclusive purview of the public sector were gradually opened up to the private sector. The policies of broadbanding, re-endorsement of capacity and the prescription of MES were part of the earlier liberalization packages before the large-scale delicensing in the NILP C19911made them redundant. Amongst these policies, the stipulation of MES was aimed at increasing the efficiency of industries where size was pivotal to efficiency.
If firms had been constrained by small size in the pre-1iberalisation period, they could expand to MES and beyond to obtain efficiency gains. But for the new firms,since entry had to be large-scale?, the cost of entry increased creating an entry barrier. This policy thereby threw up two problematic outcomes when dealing with the question of MES and the anti-competitive outcomes of such a policy in terms of concentration and firm size. Industrial organization lias shown that the relationship between size of entry and the anti—competitive effect of large sire is not so simple.
Impact of Liberalization on Indian Economy:
Total foreign investment rising from US$ .132 billion in 1991–92 to US$ 5.3 billion in 1995–96. Annual growth in GDP(shown in graph below)
As we can see in the above graph the GDP increasing continuously after 1991 and rising upto 7 times in 2010. Arrival of New Technology or Development of Technology.
Development of Infrastructure. Identity at World Level Increase Consumption and Adaptation of New Lifestyle By the mid-90s, the private capital had surpassed the public capital. The management system had shifted from the traditional family based system to a system of qualified and the liberalization era has been the emergence of a strong, affluent and buoyant middle class with significant purchasing powers and this has been the engine that has driven the economy since. Increase in Employment Increase Our Currency Value (INR) On agriculture On education On export and import On money market On human resources On life styles The low annual growth rate of the economy of India before 1980, which stagnated around 3.5% from 1950s to 1980s, while per capita income averaged 1.3%. At the same time, Pakistan grew by 5%, Indonesia by 9%, Thailand by 9%, South Korea by 10% and in Taiwan by 12%. Only four or five licences would be given for steel, electrical power and communications. License owners built up huge powerful empires. A huge public sector emerged. State-owned enterprises made large losses. Income Tax Department and Customs Department manned by IAS officers became efficient in checking tax evasion. Infrastructure investment was poor because of the public sector monopoly. Licence Raj established the "irresponsible, self-perpetuating bureaucracy that still exists throughout much of the country" and corruption flourished under this system.
Liberalisation can be divided as following:-
Industrial Sector was among the first sectors to be liberalized in India in a series of measures. Industrial licensing has been abolished except in a small number of sectors where it has been retained on strategic considerations. Reduction in the reservation of public sector: The list of industries reserved solely for the public sector -which used to cover 18 industries, including iron and steel, heavy plant and machinery, telecommunications and telecom equipment, minerals, oil, mining, air transport services and electricity generation and distribution --has been drastically
reduced to three: defense aircrafts and warships, atomic energy generation, and railway transport. Abolition of industrial licensing: Industrial licensing by the central government has been almost abolished except for a few hazardous and environmentally sensitive industries. Facilitated easy access to foreign technology Restriction were removed on expansion Opening the economy to FDI.
Foreign Direct Investment in India
Liberalizing foreign direct investment was another important part of India’s reforms, driven by the belief that this would increase the total volume of investment in the economy, improve production technology, and increase access to world markets. The policy now allows 100 percent foreign ownership in a large number of industries and majority ownership in all except banks, insurance companies, telecommunications and airlines. Procedures for obtaining permission were greatly simplified by listing industries that are eligible for automatic approval up to specified levels of foreign equity (100 percent, 74 percent and 51 percent). Potential foreign investors investing within these limits only need to register with the Reserve Bank of India. For investments in other industries, or for a higher share of equity than is automatically permitted in listed industries, applications are considered by a Foreign Investment Promotion Board that has established a track record of speedy decisions. In 1993, foreign institutional investors were allowed to purchase shares of listed Indian companies in the stock market, opening a window for portfolio investment in existing companies.
Foreign investment is more than 24% in the equity capital of units manufacturing items reserved for the small scale industries. After reforms in 1992, huge amounts of foreign direct investment came into India. Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) is a competent body to consider and recommend foreign direct investment. In 1993, foreign institutional investors were allowed to purchase shares of listed Indian companies in the stock market. The below graph shown the significant increase in foreign direct investment(FDI) after the economic reforms and liberalization.
The Important Reform Measures (Step Towards liberalization privatization and Globalization):
Indian economy was in deep crisis in July 1991, when foreign currency reserves had plummeted to almost $1 billion; Inflation had roared to an annual rate of 17 percent; fiscal deficit was very high and had become unsustainable; foreign investors and NRIs had lost confidence in Indian Economy. Capital was flying out of the country and we were close to defaulting on loans. Along with these bottlenecks at home, many unforeseeable changes swept the economies of nations in Western and Eastern Europe, South East Asia, Latin America and elsewhere, around the same time. These were the economic compulsions at home and abroad that called for a complete overhauling of our economic policies and programs. Major measures initiated as a part of the liberalization and globalization strategy in the early nineties included the following: Devaluation: The first step towards globalization was taken with the announcement of the devaluation of Indian currency by 18-19 percent against major currencies in the international foreign exchange market. In fact, this measure was taken in order to resolve the BOP crisis. Disinvestment-In order to make the process of globalization smooth, privatization and liberalization policies are moving along as well. Under the privatization scheme, most of the public sector undertakings have been/ are being sold to private sector
‘Trade liberalisation' is the term for the process whereby a country opens up its markets to international trade i.e. reduces the taxes (known as tariffs) and other limits (such as quotas) on goods coming in and out. It also often comes alongside increased rights for investors, pressures to privatize as well as imposed regulatory changes to comply with international standards. Trade liberalisation can be a good thing in the right circumstances – if it's phased in correctly at the right time in a country's development. However forcing countries to 'liberalise' their economies prematurely (for example through aid conditionality or trade agreements) has led to disastrous economic and social consequences. Import licensing was abolished relatively early for capital goods and intermediates which became freely importable in 1993, simultaneously with the switch to a flexible exchange rate regime. Import licensing had been traditionally defended on the grounds that it was necessary to manage the balance of payments, but the shift to a flexible exchange rate enabled the government to argue that any balance of payments impact would be effectively dealt with through exchange rate flexibility.
Although India’s tariff levels are significantly lower than in 1991, they remain among the highest in the developing world because most other developing countries have also reduced tariffs in this period. The weighted average import duty in China and southeast Asia is currently about half the Indian level. The government has announced that average tariffs will be reduced to around 15 percent by 2004, but even if this is implemented, tariffs in India will be much higher than in China which has committed to reduce weighted average duties to about 9 percent by 2005 as a condition for admission to the World Trade Organization.
Trade sector reforms
Elimination of import licensing
Rationalisation of tariff structure
Adaptation of flexible exchange rate
Financial liberalization (FL) refers to the deregulation of domestic financial markets and the liberalization of the capital account. In one view, it strengthens financial development and contributes to higher long-run growth. In another view, it induces excessive risk-taking, increases macroeconomic volatility and leads to more frequent crises. Financial Sector Reforms refers to the deregulation of domestic financial markets and the liberalization of the capital account
Industrial de licensing and simplification and rationalization of tax structure to promote investment and expansion. Liberal FDI regime to supplement domestic resources. Current account convertibility to have a liberal trade regime. Public sector disinvestment to ensure government does what it does best. WTO compatibility to plug into the global economy.
Fiscal Sector Liberalization:
India's fiscal sector reforms help to raise the rate of savings and investment in India. This further helps to enhance the productivity of public expenditures. India has established itself as one of the fastest growing economies in the world. India has established itself as one of the fastest growing economies in the world. India is also advancing towards the economical growth and improvement in literacy.
During 1999-2000, India's domestic savings and investment was estimated to grow by 23% and Indian economy was expected to grow by 6.4% although the average growth rate declined to 6.0% in comparison to earlier year. In the first five year plan, India had attained an average annual growth rate by 3.5%. Indian economy showed an average growth rate of 6.4%, which was 5.9% in the 80's. At the end of the 8th Five Year Plan, the annual growth rate of India reached 6.9 percent. During the period from 1991-92 the Indian economy passed through a tough time. The overall economic growth in this period declined to 1.1% and the total fiscal deficit became 8% of the GDP.
Reforms in Agriculture
A common criticism of India’s economic reforms is that they have been excessively focused on industrial and trade policy, neglecting agriculture which provides the livelihood of 60 percent of the population. Critics point to the deceleration in agricultural growth in the second half of the 1990s (shown in Table 2) as proof of this neglect.i However, the notion that trade policy changes have not helped agriculture is clearly a misconception. The reduction of protection to industry, and the accompanying depreciation in the exchange rate, has tilted relative prices in favor of agriculture and helped agricultural exports. The index of agricultural prices relative to manufactured products has increased by almost 30 percent in the past ten years (Ministry of Finance, 2002, Chapter 5). The share of India’s agricultural exports in world exports of the same commodities increased from 1.1 percent in 1990 to 1.9 percent in 1999, whereas it had declined in the ten years before the reforms. But while agriculture has benefited from trade policy changes, it has suffered in other respects, most notably from the decline in public investment in areas critical for agricultural growth, such as irrigation and drainage, soil conservation and water management systems, and rural roads. As pointed out by Gulati and Bathla (2001), this decline began much before the reforms, and was actually sharper in the 1980s than in the 1990s. They also point out that while public investment declined, this was more than offset by a rise in private investment in agriculture which accelerated after the reforms. However, there is no doubt that investment in agriculture-related infrastructure is critical for achieving higher productivity and this investment is only likely to come from the public sector. Indeed, the rising trend in private investment could easily be dampened if public investment in these critical areas is not increased.
Rapid growth in a globalized environment requires a well-functioning infrastructure including especially electric power, road and rail connectivity, telecommunications, air transport, and efficient ports. India lags behind east and southeast Asia in these areas. These services were traditionally provided by public sector monopolies but since the investment needed to expand capacity and improve quality could not be mobilized by the public sector, these sectors were opened to private investment, including foreign investment. However, the difficulty in creating an environment which would make it possible for private investors to enter on terms that would appear reasonable to consumers, while providing an adequate risk- return profile to investors, was greatly underestimated. Many false starts and disappointments have resulted. The greatest disappointment has been in the electric power sector, which was the first area opened for private investment. Private investors were expected to produce electricity for sale to the State Electricity Boards, which would control of transmission and distribution. However, the State Electricity Boards were financially very weak, partly because electricity tariffs for many categories of consumers were too low and also because very large amounts of power were lost in transmission and distribution. This loss, which should be between 10 to 15 percent on technical grounds (depending on the extent of the rural network), varies from 35 to 50 percent. The difference reflects theft of electricity, usually with the connivance of the distribution staff. Private investors, fearing nonpayment by the State Electricity Boards insisted on arrangements which guaranteed purchase of electricity by state governments backed by additional guarantees from the central government. These arrangements attracted criticism because of controversies about the reasonableness of the tariffs demanded by private sector power producers. Although a large number of proposals for private sector projects amounting to about 80 percent of existing generation capacity were initiated, very few reached financial closure and some of those which were implemented ran into trouble subsequently.ii Because of these difficulties, the expansion of generation capacity by the utilities in the 1990s has been only about half of what was targeted and the quality of power remained poor with large voltage fluctuations and frequent interruptions.
Arguments in the favour of Liberalization:
Increase in rate of economic growth Increase in competitiveness of industrial sector Reduction in poverty and inequality Fall in fiscal deficit Control on prices Decline in deficit of BOP Increase in Efficiency Development of economy without capital investment. Increase the foreign investment. Increase the foreign exchange reserve. Increase in consumption and Control over price. Reduction in dependence on external commercial borrowings
Arguments Against of Liberalization:
Less importance to agriculture. Pressure by IMF and World Bank. More depending on Foreign Debt. Dependence on Foreign technology. Undue importance to Privatization. Problem of Unemployment.
Privatization means transfer of ownership and/or management of an enterprise from the public sector to the private sector . Privatization is opening up of an industry that has been reserved for public sector to the private sector. Privatization means replacing government monopolies with the competitive pressures of the marketplace to encourage efficiency, quality and innovation in the delivery of goods and services.
It Means that opening up of the economy for foreign direct investment by liberalizing the rules and regulations and by creating favorable socio-economic and political climate for global business. Opening and planning to expand business throughout the world. Buying and selling goods and services from/to any countries in the world.
In 1991 our foreign exchange reserve was only 1 billion dollar of Import ,GDP growth was standstill ,economy was in sambles ,No private entrepreneurs were allowed to enter in GOV controlled Industries .India needed desperately developments in all sectors .License raj was controlling our all growth .Capacity enhansements in all core sectors were stopped. Our Gold was put to security to foreign countries for money to save India. No jobs ,no telephone, no housing ,virtually no development .Our present PM Dr Manmohan Singh was FM in 1991 and amids lot of criticism with in party and opposition ,Dr Singh with great support of late PM P.V.Narsimha Rao even against the wishes of Sonia Gandhi ,Chidambaram presented a great budget of economic liberisation .This liberalization was duly supported by the then opposition leader ,another great man Atal Behari Bajpai of BJP .Within 4 years of liberalisation Indian foreign exchange reserve rose to 140 billion dollar ,Private entrepreneurship started coming up in a big way in Steel, IT , Roads , infrastructures ,housing ,telephone and so many sectors and created a base for further developments .Now after 17 years of liberalisation ,you can see the developments in all the sectors where every 5 men in India 3 have mobile phone ,300 dollar foreign exchange reserve ,GDP growth is 9 % per annum .Despite world recession ,Indian economy stood resolutely against any odd .Only regret is India could not be free from ugly corruption in everywhere.
Difference between pre and post liberalization:
PRE-LIBERALISATION POST-LIBERALISATION 1.Quantitative licensing on trade and industry 1. Abolition of industrial and trade licensing 2. State regulated monopolies of utilities and 2. Removal of state monopolies, privatization
Trade 3. Government control on finance and capital Markets 4. Restrictions on foreign investment and Technology 5.Import substitution and export of primary Goods 6. High duties & taxes with multiple rates and large dispersion 7. Sector-specific monetary, fiscal and tariff policies 8. End-use and sector-specific multiple and controlled interest rates 9. Foreign exchange control, no convertibility of rupee 10. Multiple and fixed exchange rates 11. Administered prices for minerals, utilities, essential goods 12. Tax concessions on exports and savings 13. Explicit subsidies on food, fertilizers, and some essential items 14. Hidden subsidies on power, urban transport, public goods, POL 15. General lack of consumers protection and other rights 16. Central planning, discretionary process, high degree of bureaucracy
& divestment 3. Liberalization of financial and capital markets 4. Liberal regime for FDI, portfolio In 5. Export promotion and export diversification, no import bias 6. Reduction and rationalization of taxes and duties 7. Sector-neutral monetary, fiscal and tariff policies 8. Flexible interest rates without any end-use or sector specifications vestment, foreign tech 9. Abolition of exchange control, full convertibility on current A/C 10. United and market determined exchange .rates 11. Abolition of all administered prices except for few drugs 12. Rationalized and being phased out 13. No change, budget subsidies on LPG and kerosene introduced 14. No change, but user charges are being rationalized, and subsidies targeted 15. Acts governing consumer rights, IPR, independent regulatory authority 16. Decentralization, sound institutional framework, reforming civil services
17. Outdated Companies Act 18. No exit policy for land and labour 19. Outdated legal system
17. No change 18. No change in labor policy, slow progress of reforms in land markets 19. No change
India’s reforms are often unfavorably compared with the very different sequencing adopted in China, which began with reforms in agriculture in 1978, extending them to industry only in 1984. The comparison is not entirely fair since Chinese agriculture faced an extremely distorted incentive structure, with virtually no role for markets, which provided an obvious area for high priority action with potentially large benefits. Since Indian agriculture operated to a much greater extent under market conditions, the situation was very different.
The best known of these was the Dabhol project of the Enron cooperation which became mired in controversy because of the high cost of power from the project especially as a consequence of a pricing arrangement which meant that most of the tariff was U.S. dollar denominated and that the risk of rupee depreciation against the dollar was borne by the buyer.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.