Ofcourse, India has always followed the Tricle Down Theory appraoch -since 
Nehru rule . Wealth will trickle down to the masses -- just the way it has been 
trickling across the globe from richer nations to poorer ones for ages.
   
  Umesh

barua25 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
    BODY {   FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, 
sans-serif  }  A {   FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #0b2345; FONT-STYLE: normal; 
FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  A:visited {   
COLOR: #1f1f1f  }  A:hover {   TEXT-DECORATION: underline  }  P {   
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal; 
FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  H1 {   FONT-WEIGHT: 
bold; FONT-SIZE: 14px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 
verdana, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  H2 {   FONT-WEIGHT: bold; 
FONT-SIZE: 13px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, 
sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  H3 {   PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 
0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; 
COLOR: #1f1f1f; PADDING-TOP: 0px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, 
sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  H4 {   PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 
0px; FONT-WEIGHT:
 bold; FONT-SIZE: 11px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #1f1f1f; 
PADDING-TOP: 0px; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: verdana, sans-serif; 
TEXT-DECORATION: none  }  HR {   WIDTH: 100%; COLOR: #ff9900; HEIGHT: 1px; 
size: 1px  }            


   
  INDIA ABROAD, APRIL 13, 2007
   
  PRINT EDITION, PAGE A-40
   
  'THE HIGHER THE GROWTH, THE GREATER THE ANTAGONISM'
   
  Economist Prabhat Patnaik discusses the dark side of India's economic growth 
with Senior Editor Suman Guha Mozumder
   
  India's economy may be booming, its industries thriving, its middle class 
heady with the promise of a great future. But Prabhat Patnaik, a professor of 
economics at Jawaharlal Nehru University, worries what the changes augur for 
the rest of the nation. Patnaik was in New York last month to take part in a 
public conversation on 'An Emergent India: Problems and Prospects' along with 
Nobel Laureate and Columbia's economics Professor Joseph Stiglitz. In an 
interview with INDIA ABROAD after the discussion, Patnaik, who is also 
vice-chairman of the Kerala State Planning Board, talked about his concerns 
about modern India.
   
  Q. There were concerns, especially during the rule of the government led by 
the Bharatiya Janata Party earlier that while India was shining -- a slogan 
coined by the BJP -- it was not shining on all its population. Have things 
changed under the Manmohan Singh government?
   
  A.I think they are continuing pretty much the same way. But one of two things 
that have happened is of some importance. One is the passing of the Employment 
Guarantee Act, which promises every rural household 100 days of guaranteed 
employment. It was initially launched only in 200 districts but it's understood 
that it will be extended to the whole country.
   
  A lot of campaigning was done to get this through. This act differs from 
every other previous employment program as it actually makes it a right [to be 
employed]. But the only problem with it is the state machinery is so enmeshed 
in neo-liberalism that I do not think that even though it is rights based -- 
even though it is the case that anybody who demands employment and does not get 
it can take the government to court -- much might happen. The problems of 
non-implementation are to be found almost everywhere. Poor and unemployed 
people do not take the government to court. They just cannot. But, at the same 
time, I think this is something that gives us a handle, at least when public 
and political organizations take the cause of the poor and fight on their 
behalf. So it is a very enabling thing to do. The basic directions of 
neo-liberal policies have not changed, but because of intensive campaigning, 
this act has been passed, which is of potential significance.
   
  Q. If the basic policies have not changed and, as you mentioned, poverty is 
actually increasing in India despite the growth ...
   
  A. I would not even say that poverty is increasing despite the growth. I 
would say that the kind of growth we are experiencing in India is actually 
based on an exacerbation of antagonism. As a result it is growth where to 
expect a trickle-down effect would be absurd. In fact, the higher the growth, 
the greater the antagonism. Suppose you have higher growth. Then there will be 
even more demand for, let us say, a Wal-Mart to be opened. Therfore, there will 
be an even greater dispossession as far as petty and retail traders are 
concerned.
   
  So, it is a kind of growth where it is not that higher growth would pull 
everybody up, but on the contrary higher growth would actually make things 
worse for a whole lot of people at the bottom.
   
  Q. Could you elaborate?
   
  A. When you have higher growth, there is more income at the upper level. 
Because of the kind of growth, which inequalizes growth any way, there will be 
more demands, let's say, for a golf course, or luxury apartments and therefore 
agricultural land will be taken away and there will be more dispossession of 
the peasants. So, it is not just that higher growth is associated with greater 
poverty, but actually this is a kind of growth where it is part of the 
intrinsic nature of the growth itself.
   
  Q. So you mean this kind of higher growth would spell out displacemement from 
traditional occupations like agriculture and, in turn, lead to poverty?
   
  A. Yes. That is the kind of situation I am talking about.[The result can be]  
unemployment, dispossession and displacement of petty producers and peasants, 
and a greater agrarian crisis etc. Suppose you have an even higher growth rate, 
there will be more people demanding that an airport be constructed. If there 
are more people demanding such things, investments will go there and not to 
social sectors or to the rural infrastructure development. So, in that sense, 
the increasing growth on one side and the increasing poverty on the other side 
are in fact interlinked.
   
  Q. So, as they say, the rising tide will not lift all the boats.
   
  A. Exactly. It's futile to expect that higher growth will actually have a 
trickle-down effect. Even now, higher growth has not touched the poor; if we 
still have even higher growth, it is not going to touch the poor. That is not 
going to happen.
   
  Q. Tell me then, how does one go about industrializing a country like India? 
Obviously, you need to acquire land. Given the resistance against acquisition 
these days, what is the way out?
   
  A. The point is, the peasants who are displaced must themselves have an 
interest in the industry that is being created for them. They should be 
employed. Also, you need to give them equity. Let them get compensation.
   
  If you look at the case of Orissa, the tribals were given compensation, but 
within two years, their land value has gone up 10 times. Now they feel cheated. 
Therefore, for the foregone capital gain they would have made, you have to give 
them an equity share. You have to work a whole package, not just make promises, 
before taking their land, [ensure] they are compensated for the land, 
compensated for the loss of employment and for the capital gains foregone and 
share equity.
   
  Q. Recently, a member of India's Commerce Ministry's Parliamentary 
Consultative Committee said in New York that the government is considering 
giving them equity and will announce that very soon. Do you think once that is 
done, the problems relating to land acquisition will be resolved?
   
  A. My fundamental point is that these issues have to be settled through 
social consultations and negotiations. These are not issues about which you can 
just impose [a solution] on the peasants. In other words, legally, it is true 
that the government has the right to take land [after providing] adequate 
compensation for building something there for the public good. But here, we are 
talking about building industry by the private sector, so you cannot use the 
old principle or the law. It has to be negotiated properly with the peasants. 
It has to be done on the basis of democratic consultations.
   
  Gone are the days when you could just tell peasants that you are taking their 
land and just give them some money in lieu. In a way they [protests] are good. 
It is a case of assertion by ordinary people, assertion of peoples' democratic 
rights and expression of a voice of people who are marginalized.
   
  I welcome it, in fact, because normally such people would be brushed aside in 
the name of development. But if somebody stands up and says 'sorry, I'm not 
interested in giving you land,' then you have to negotiate with him. Now that 
is basically the assertion of a democratic right. 
   
  Q. Although this is not for a special economic zone, the Left Front 
government in West Bengal has taken land in Singur apparently with the consent 
of the farmers. Despite this, one is seeing protests and resistance building up 
there and elsewhere almost daily. Do you think it is a case of peasants being 
frustrated by the Left's turnaround after fighting farmers' rights and for the 
equitable distribution of land?
   
  A. Actually, if you look at the details of the land acquisition, the West 
Bengal government's terms were probably better than many other states. In 
Orissa, I know those who were agitating against land acquisition used to demand 
the same terms as those of Bengal. There are two problems. One of course, is 
that many peasants who had given their land to the government for reasonable 
money, believed at the time of the sale that there was no option. Later, they 
found out the truth and began harboring second thoughts. The other thing is 
there is a problem with land acquired in West Bengal. Some of the unrecorded 
sharecroppers there have to be compensated.
   
  The West Bengal government arranged for compensation for those who are 
recorded tenants. But, apparently, there were some unrecorded sharecroppers in 
the Singur area. This is not official as yet, but the government is going to 
compensate them as well. This is something being worked out. The issue is not 
just whether the West Bengal terms are good or bad, the issue is different. 
What is happening now is that various states in India are engaged in cutthroat 
competition to attract private investment.
   
  The logic of capitalism is that capitalists compete against one another. But 
here, the capitalists have a monopoly and these governments are ruthlessly 
competing against each other to attract investments.This is absurd and West 
Bengal is caught in the same trap. I think the states and the [federal 
government] should get together. I think what is more worrying is that public 
exchequers are being used by the various state governments to subsidize 
capitalists.
   
  Q. I remember you talked about the dwindling social sector expenditure by the 
government. Do you think the present unrest, incidents like peasants' suicides, 
etc. have something to do with the decrease in the social sector expenditure, 
especially in the farm sector?
   
  A. Without a doubt. What many people do not understand is that obviously, 
when the peasants' prices fall or the costs rise, peasants' income dwindles and 
when that happens, if the peasants have access to a whole lot of things like 
free education, free healthcare, they have some security. They feel that while 
their income has dwindled, there are other areas from where they can have some 
security.
   
  But, simultaneously [along with income decrease], if you find that your 
social sector expenditure is also dwindling, you have a situation that, when 
your father falls ill, you are forced to go to a money lender to be able to 
take him to hospital. At that point of time, you are not thinking about the 
fall in your income. 
   
  But if you had a proper government-funded medical service, some of these 
problems would not arise. The peasantry is driven to desperation because of 
reduced income that has been accompanied by reduced social security. The two 
together has actually made it impossible, which is why most of them are 
indebted to money lenders. The health expenditure, in fact, is a very important 
cause of debt to money lenders.
   
  Q. Do you find it ironic that, somehow, the decline in social sector 
expenditure has coincided with the rising growth story of India?
   
  A. That is quite correct. [Economist] Amartya Sen started this idea of the 
Kerala model. It was a wonderful case of social sector expenditure, covering 
all levels of human development, but when that was happening you found that 
growth was very little. On the other hand, in more recent years, growth has 
picked up, and social sector expenditure has dwindled. So it is a very clear 
example of how growth does not really enable you to have larger social sector 
expenditure. In fact, social sector expenditure requires a degree of commitment 
by the government.
   
  Q. It is often felt that, in India there has been over emphasis on tertiary 
education and under emphasis on primary education. How do you link this to 
development?
   
  A. I reject that view. I think it is not a question of one versus the other. 
In fact, the education sector as a whole has been neglected. Our total 
expenditure on education as a proportion of GDP is less than what the South 
African government used to spend on blacks during the apartheid era. So, 
India's expenditure on education as a proportion to GDP has been meager. It has 
to be raised; unfortunately, we had this idea for a long time of raising 
education expenditure to 6% of GDP, but we have come nowhere near it and are 
way below it even today.
   
  How can you run a modern economy without ideas generated? Ideas are generated 
in universities. I think freedom of a country depends on having independent 
ideas. You can't borrow other countries' ideas and then expect to remain free. 
That being the case, this idea in some quarters that somehow India is spending 
too much on education is wrong. In fact, we have to spend more on education, 
both primary and tertiary.
   
  Q. But there has been opposition from the Left to the entry of foreign 
universities in India. 
   
  A. That is right. It services no purpose. You have to strengthen your own 
universities because this whole business of foreign universities does not work. 
Our problems are different; our societies are different. In other words, 
education is not something like a supermarket. It must address itself to 
societal needs and, for that to happen, you cannot just have a little branch of 
Harvard or Columbia. It has to be specific to the country and society.
   
  Q. Do you see any fundamental change coming in the 11th five-year plan?
   
  A. Not really. I think the original approach paper was very conservative. 
There is a lot of criticism. It is pretty much going along the old way. I do 
not see any significant change in the five year plan.
   
  Q. Where is India going, as far as development is concerned?
   
  A. Let me put it this way. If the notion of development consists of becoming 
a big power, a major player in international arena and so on, then India has 
taken it seriously. But that is not my notion of development. Development is an 
improvement in the living condition of the people, and if that is the notion of 
development, I believe India is not doing well at all. To me, big-power status 
is irrelevant. What is relevant to me, as Mahatma Gandhi once said, is wiping 
away the tears from the eyes of every India. That is what we have to do.
  _________________________________________________________________
        
  PS: (*)This update is being sent to you because we believe you welcome it. 
If, however, you prefer not to receive similar information updates on India, 
US-India relations and related security issues, please reply to this message 
with the word "UNSUBSCRIBE" on the subject field.


    poweredpanwebmailer {font-family: arial, verdana, sans-serif;font-size : 
10px; font-variant: small-caps; font-weight : normal; padding: 2px; 
padding-left:20px;}  a:link.poweredpanwebmailer,  a:active.poweredpanwebmailer, 
 a:visited.poweredpanwebmailer  {font-family: Arial, verdana, sans-serif; 
font-size : 10px; font-variant: small-caps; font-weight : normal; color : 
#1f1f1f; text-align : center; text-decoration : none; padding: 2px;}  
a:hover.poweredpanwebmailer {color : #7D7B7B;}    Powered By PanWebMailer 
Version 2.0 © 2004-2005 _______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org



Umesh Sharma

Washington D.C. 

1-202-215-4328 [Cell]

Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005


















http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/
       
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Tryit now.
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
[email protected]
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to