It gives me great pleasure to inaugurate the seminar on, 'Development through
Planning, Markets or De-centralisation' during the Golden Jubilee of IIT. The
subject of the present seminar is extremely important at the present stage of
Indian economic development. This three-day seminar I am sure, will provide useful
insights into various issues relevant for policy-making to guide India successfully
through paradigm search and paradigm shift. There are pergent views on theme of
the present seminar and I believe the illustrious scholars participating in this
seminar will touch upon them. The seminar would provide an important outlet for
sharing and discussing rich experiences on such a relevant topic. I congratulate
the Humanities and Social Sciences Department of IIT Bombay for organizing this
seminar on an important topic.
The reform process of the mid-1980s and 1990s has been successful in gradually
establishing the pre-conditions for smooth functioning of the market. However,
concurrently, the Eight, Ninth and Tenth five year plans provided the overall
direction to the economy. The outcome of such an experience has been encouraging
on several fronts though there exist a large unfinished agenda. On the positive
side, the Indian economy has entered a high growth phase since 2003-04 breaking
the lacklustre performance what late Prof. Raj Krishna described by the catchy
phrase "the Hindu rate of growth". While the real GDP growth for the
Tenth Plan period (2002-03 to 2006-07) averaged 7.6 per cent per annum, during
2005-06 and 2006-07, the growth rate has been above 9.0 per cent level. The major
issue facing the Indian economy at this point is whether this high growth phase
can be sustained. It is in this context that the debate on planning versus
decentralization versus market becomes crucial. One thing is very
clear that right combination of strategy would be required to steer India through
from a developing economy to a developed economy.
Rethinking on economic policy in India has not been an exclusive and distinct
process, but has been derived from the international thinking. The broad outline
of the reforms that were initiated in the mid-1980s was not very different from
the reforms undertaken by many developing countries around that time. The limitations
of a development strategy based on import substitution, public sector dominance
and extensive Government control over the private sector had become evident by
then, and there was no choice other than changing the system itself in a fundamental
way. The broad characteristics of the system change involved liberalisation of
Government controls, a larger role for the private sector and greater integration
with the world economy. India’s reforms differed from rest of the world
in that it was implemented at a much more gradual pace keeping in view the Indian
context and Indian specific circumstances, and the gradualism strategy paid off
in warding off any financial crisis of sorts witnessed in East Asian economies
or Latin American economies.
After giving a historical background of planning in India, I would touch upon
the policy changes as a part of the structural reforms in different sectors of
the Indian economy. I would also review the achievements in terms of the performance
of the economy in the post-reform period. The concluding observations would delineate
some of the challenges that lie ahead. I. Historical
Background
The Planning Commission was set up in March 1950 with the objectives of promoting
a rapid increase in the standard of living of the people by efficient exploitation
of the resources of the country, increasing production and offering opportunities
to all for employment in the service of the community. The Planning Commission
was entrusted with the responsibility of making assessment of all resources of
the country, augmenting deficient resources, formulating plans for the most effective
and balanced utilisation of resources and determining priorities. The evolution
of India's development policy over the past fifty years is a unique illustration
of change with continuity – though the underlying objective has been the
same, the emphasis of each plan varied in accordance with the evolving situation.
During the first three Five Year Plans India's process of development consists
of the following three elements: (a) modernization of the economy; (b) self-reliance;
and (c) socialism or, more correctly a socialist pattern of society with equity
and social justice. For the following two decades, policies were adjusted to the
changes in the objective conditions of the economy. For the first eight plans,
the emphasis was on a growing public sector with massive investments in basic
and heavy industries. Among the prominent features of public policy, licensing
regulated the scale of operations of every firm; reservations and other incentives
favoured small-scale industries; strict labour laws constrained large enterprises;
and the MRTP Act was the final safeguard against concentration. In short, private
initiative and growth, were to that extent stymied although it has to be accepted
that the impressive growth performance since 1990s was possible due to the strong
foundation of an industrial base and the knowledge enhancing institutions. Since
the launch of the Ninth Plan in 1997, the emphasis on the public sector has become
less pronounced and the current thinking on planning in the country, in general,
is that it should increasingly be of an indicative nature. II.
Economic Reforms of the 1990s The economic reforms of the 1990s
included: significant industrial and trade liberalization; financial deregulation;
improvements in supervisory and regulatory systems; and policies more conducive
to privatization and foreign direct investment. One of the major initiatives in
the reforms spectrum was in the area of industrial and trade policy.
Industrial Reforms The pre-liberalisation industrial policy
was characterised by several restrictions on private investment on subjects like,
areas allowed for investment, scale of operations, location of new investment
and even the technology to be used. As a result, the Indian industrial structure
was highly inefficient as documented by a number of empirical studies. In order
to protect this inefficient industrial structure, the trade policy necessarily
had to be restrictive and protective. Considering all the costs these restrictive
policies inflicted on the economy, there was a near consensus amongst economists
and policy makers about the need for reforms in the industrial sector. Before
the reforms, around 18 industries were reserved for sole operation by the public
sector. This list has been reduced over the period and at present only three
industries - defence aircrafts and warships, atomic energy generation and railway
transport, are reserved for the public sector. Another major area of reforms was
the industrial licensing. Currently industrial licensing by the Central Government
is restricted only for a few hazardous and environmentally sensitive areas. The
MRTP Act has been diluted. The list of items reserved for production by the small
scale sector has been pruned substantially. Some of the most crucial items which
were removed from the reservation list included highly export-oriented items like
garments, shoes, toys and auto components. Trade and Investment
Reforms Prior the reforms, the trade policy was characterised by
high tariff and pervasive import restrictions. Import of manufacturing commodities
was completely banned. In order to import capital goods, raw materials and intermediaries,
where indigenous substitutes were available, licenses were required. This made
imports not only cumbersome and time consuming, but also resulted in inefficient
industrial production as mentioned earlier. The aim of reforms in the trade policy
was to phase out import licensing and rationalisation of import duties. The requirements
of import license for capital goods and intermediaries were relaxed as early as
1993. Removal of restrictions on import of manufactured consumer goods and agricultural
products was a more lengthy process as the number of domestic producers affected
by this change was large. The quantitative restrictions on imports of manufactured
consumer goods were finally removed in 2001. Prior to 1991,
there were several restrictions on foreign direct investment in India, making
it almost impossible for foreign entities to operate in India or collaborate with
Indian companies. There was a growing understanding that liberalisation was needed
on this front in order to increase the total volume of investment in the economy,
improve production technology, increase access to world market and also improve
efficiency in the domestic production processes by introducing an element of competition.
Owing to the reforms in this direction, 100 per cent/majority foreign ownership
is now allowed in a number of industries with a few exceptions.
Procedures for obtaining permission were greatly simplified by listing industries
that are eligible for automatic approval up to specified level of foreign equity
(100 per cent, 74 per cent and 51 per cent). In order to get the required permission,
the foreign investors only need to register with the Reserve Bank. In case of
foreign direct investment in areas other than that covered by the automatic route
list and also in case higher than automatically permitted investment proposals,
the interested parties are required to go through the Foreign Investment Promotion
Board. Since 1993, investments in Indian equities by Foreign Institutional Investors
(FIIs) are permitted and presently the FIIs as a class has become a dominant player
in the Indian stock markets. The reforms in trade and industrial policy had a
deep rooted impact on the industrial sector in India. The Indian companies became
more efficient thanks to the competitive pressures. The domestic players reaped
the benefits of upgraded technology and expanded to more efficient scales of production
to withstand the competitive pressure. Many domestic players also had to restructure
their business activities through mergers and acquisitions. Others refocused their
business strategies to concentrate on their areas of core competency. Infrastructure
Reforms Rapid growth of the economy can be sustained only if there
are no infrastructural bottlenecks. In fact, infrastructural facilities like electricity
and telecommunications, connectivity through water, roads, railways and air transportation,
are the backbone of an emerging economy. The State Governments have taken
some initiatives by instituting independent statutory regulators, which are expected
to set tariffs at a level which is fair to both consumers and producers. Privatization
of power distribution has also been affected by some states, though implementation
of these reforms has been met with some resistance. Comparatively, India’s
performance in the telecommunication sector is much better. There are several
private sector service providers operating in fixed line and cellular services.
As a result, while the tele-density has improved substantially over the period,
waiting period to get new connections has come down drastically. The most striking
impact was on the long distance charges, which have been reduced substantially.
In the case of civil aviation, the entry of private players has introduced competition
and this has resulted in lowering tariff rates across the spectrum. While there
have been some remarkable initiatives in the case of road transport, the railways
have also witnessed winds of change in recent years. Tariffs have been rationalised
and newer avenues of earning revenue are being explored extensively.
Agricultural Reforms As compared with the industrial policy
and trade policy, the reforms in agricultural sector were slow. Some economists
have suggested that the reform process indirectly benefitted the agricultural
sector as the reduction in protection to industry and the accompanying depreciation
in exchange rate titled the relative prices in favour of agriculture and agricultural
exports. The Government stepped up efforts to improve agricultural productivity
through regionally differentiated strategies under the macro management mode of
planning and implementation, introduced in October 2000, subsuming all earlier
Centrally Sponsored Schemes. Agriculture has, however, suffered due to decline
in public investment in areas which are crucial for agricultural growth, viz.,
irrigation, soil conservation, water management and rural roads. Some studies
have suggested that this decline in public investment was more than offset by
the increase in private investment in agriculture. However, the fact remains that
initiatives which can kick-start the growth process are likely to be undertaken
only by the public sector. Thus a lot remains to be done in the area of agricultural
reforms. Financial Sector Reforms Financial
sector reforms, which are an important institutional underpinning for real sector
reforms, have also made considerable progress. A modern and efficient financial
system is necessary not only to provide a conducive environment for private saving,
but also to ensure that these are channelled into the most productive investment
opportunities. The principal objective of financial sector reforms was to improve
the allocative efficiency of resources, ensure financial stability and maintain
confidence in the financial system by enhancing its soundness and efficiency.
At the same time, reforms were also undertaken in various segments of financial
markets, to enable the banking sector to perform its intermediation role in an
efficient manner. With a view to making the reform measures mutually reinforcing,
the reform process was carried forward through analysis and recommendations by
various Committees/Working Groups and extensive consultations with experts and
market participants. One of the special features of the reforms was that these
were carefully sequenced in terms of instruments and objectives. Thus, prudential
norms were introduced early in the reform cycle, followed by interest rate deregulation
and gradually lowering of statutory preemptions. The more complex aspects of legal
and accounting measures were ushered in subsequently when the basic tenets of
the reforms were already in place. While the focus of the first generation of
reforms was to create an efficient, productive and profitable financial services
industry, the second phase of financial sector reforms, beginning from the second-half
of the 1990s, was aimed at strengthening of the financial system and bringing
of structural improvements.
The need to prepare the financial system in a more globalised environment and
to promote financial stability in the face of domestic and external shocks was
on the top of agenda of reforms. With increasing globalisation of the Indian economy,
the reform process witnessed a significant move towards adoption of international
best practices in several crucial areas of importance such as prudential norms,
banking supervision, data dissemination and corporate governance. The desired
reforms to align with what are considered appropriate global practices, in financial
sector, in terms of timing and redesigning to suit our conditions must recognise
the status and developments in the real sector, especially flexibilities, fiscal
health and overall governance standards.
With a view to increasing competition in the banking sector, new private sector
banks were licensed. A prerequisite for grant of the licence was that these banks
had to be fully automated from day one. The results are self-evident as these
banks have become high-tech banks. This has had a 'demonstration' effect on the
entire system. The Government ownership in nationalised and State Bank of India
was brought down by allowing them to raise capital from the equity market up to
49/45 per cent of paid-up capital. A unique feature of the reform of public sector
banks, which dominated the Indian banking sector, was the process of financial
restructuring. Banks were recapitalised by the Government to meet prudential norms
through recapitalisation bonds. The mechanism of hiving-off bad loans to a separate
government asset management company was not considered appropriate in view of
the moral hazard. The overhang of non-performing loans had to be managed.
The pestment of equity and offer to private shareholders was undertaken through
a public offer and not by sale to strategic investors. Consequently, all the public
sector banks, which issued shares to private shareholders, have been listed on
the exchanges and are subject to the same disclosure and market discipline standards
as other listed entities. Banks were also allowed to persify into various financial
services and are now offering a whole range of financial products like universal
banks. Active
steps were also taken to improve the institutional arrangements, including the
legal framework and technological system what is referred to as financial ecology.
To tackle the issue of high level of non-performing assets (NPAs), Debt Recovery
Tribunals (DRTs) were established consequent to the passing of Recovery of Debts
Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. To provide a significant impetus
to banks to ensure sustained recovery, the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act was passed
in 2002. While transfer of NPAs of public sector banks to separate asset management
companies was not considered, an institutional mechanism to deal with distressed
assets of banks and financial institutions has been created. Asset Reconstruction
Companies have been allowed to be set up which are in the private sector and operate
as independent commercial entities to acquire non-performing assets from any financial
entity and restructure and rehabilitate or liquidate them within a definite time
frame. This has created a market for distressed assets in India.
The Government securities, money and forex markets have significant public policy
implications for an emerging market economy. These have developed during the reform
period with impressive persification of participants and instruments.
The smooth functioning
of the payment and settlement system is a pre-requisite for financial stability.
The introduction of Real-time Gross Settlement (RTGS) system and setting
up of the Clearing Corporation of India Limited (CCIL) which acts as a central
counterparty for securities and forex transactions and guarantees both the securities
and funds legs of the transaction have enhanced the efficiency and stability of
the payments mechanism.
There has been a constant rebalancing of reform priorities predicated upon the
domestic and global business environment, institution of prudential practices,
upgradation of the regulatory and supervisory framework, institution of appropriate
institutional and legal reforms and the state of openness of the economy. In retrospect,
the key success of financial sector reforms in India since they were instituted
in the early 1990s has been the maintenance of financial stability through a period
marked by repeated financial crises across the world. The process of reforms is
noteworthy not only for the absence of turbulence in its path but also for the
sheer dimensions of the change achieved from the position where we started.
III. Impact of Economic Reforms of the 1990s
These changes introduced across several sectors of the economy gave a sharp boost
to growth. The impressive growth performance since 1990s was possible due to as
stated earlier strong foundation of an indigenous industrial base, domestic entrepreneurial
class, knowledge enhancing institutions and improvements in vertical social and
economic mobility during the decades 1960s to 1990s. The recent growth dividend
is not just a miracle of marketisation but is built on decades of conscious nation
building since independence and extension of the Reserve Bank’s mandate
during the period interalia to building institutions and improving their
delivery capabilities. Some of the major achievements have been: i.
Annual real GDP growth averaged 5.7 per cent for the 1990s and 6.9 per cent for
the period 2000-01 to 2006-07. The high real GDP growth during recent years was
led by both industrial and services sector. ii. Poverty has fallen significantly.
Poverty rate is estimated to have fallen from 37 per cent in 1993-94 to 28 per
cent in 2004-05, clearly establishing the link between faster growth and poverty
reduction. Measures of income inequality also declined during this period.
iii. Other social indicators have shown similar improvements over the last
two decades or so: life expectancy has increased from 53 in 1980 to 63 years during
1999-2003; the infant mortality rate has dropped from 110 in 1981 to 58 per thousand
live births in 2005; and literacy has risen from 44 in 1981 to 65 per cent in
2001. iv. The external position has also strengthened: since the 1991
balance of payments crisis, official reserves have risen steadily and now stand
at around US $282 billion (as on January 11, 2008). Although the current account
deficit has remained modest, averaging one per cent of GDP since the early 1990s,
the integration of the Indian economy with the global economy has increased significantly
over the same period. This can be seen in the steady rise in the current receipts-GDP
ratio from around 8 per cent in 1990-91 to 27 per cent in 2006-07. Over the same
period, current receipts and current payments combined together increased from
19 per cent to 54 per cent. Gross capital inflows and outflows constituted 46
per cent of GDP in 2006-07 as compared with only 12 per cent in 1990-91.
v. External debt has declined to around 18 per cent of GDP. vi.
It is important to note that not only has there been a steady upward shift in
India’s growth path, but this has also been accompanied by enduring stability.
A remarkable feature of India's growth experience has been its resilience to both
global and domestic shocks. vii. The fiscal reforms through the Fiscal
Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) is a significant measure. Overall,
the fiscal reform process spanning both the Centre and States has been wide ranging
of which the important ones are: (i) unique features in the management of public
debt which impact stability - States have no direct exposure to external debt
and almost the whole of public debt is in domestic currency and held mostly by
residents; (ii) The Reserve Bank cannot subscribe to primary issues since April
1997, thereby providing safeguards to monetary policy from the consequences of
expansionary fiscal policy.
However, there are several challenges of reforming the public sector enterprise,
improving agricultural productivity and efficiency, financing public infrastructure,
reducing poverty, expanding access to education and environmental, etc.
From a central banking perspective, in the Indian context, the principal challenge
for public policy is to ensure a smooth transition to higher growth path, accompanied
by low and stable inflation and well anchored inflation expectations. For the
Indian financial system, the biggest challenge is how to extend itself and innovate
to meet the new demands for financial inclusion and respond adequately to new
opportunities and risks. Innovative channels for credit delivery for serving the
new credit needs have to be developed, perhaps with greater use of information
technology and intensified skills development in human capital. Notwithstanding
the substantial improvement in the domestic banking system, it will need to be
further strengthened to face greater external competition and introduction of
financial innovations and fuller capital account convertibility. It will require
action on several fronts like introduction of greater competition; convergence
of activities and supervision of financial conglomerates; induction of new technology;
improvement in credit risk appraisal; encouragement of financial innovations and
improvement in internal controls. The role of the Reserve Bank in this context
amounts to promoting safety and soundness while allowing the banking system to
compete and innovate. There exists a well functioning fairly deep and liquid markets
for bonds currency and derivatives market. However it needs further development
to enhance the efficiency of the transmission mechanism, along with the development
of the corporate debt market and exchange traded interest rate futures. RBI has
already placed in public domain draft guidelines on currency futures and credit
derivatives. Over and above, price stability and financial stability would
continue to be the main challenges with expected increase in credit expansion
and global integration.
India’s social indicators at the start of the reforms in 1991 lagged behind
the levels achieved in south-east Asia around twenty years ago when these countries
started growing rapidly (Dreze and Sen, 1995). While privatisation in all other
sectors of the economy were initiated with the reform process, there was a growing
understanding that in order to bring about improvement in social sector, a stronger
Government initiative is required. While the Central Government expenditure
on social sector as percentage of GDP has shown an increasing trend in the post-reform
period, albeit with some exceptional years, the State Government expenditure
on social sector has declined. On the whole, taking Central and State expenditure
together, social sector expenditure has more or less remained constant.
Thus while the social indicators have shown some improvements in post-reform period,
these can be associated with the indirect effect of economic growth and not to
any directed effort. It is almost a consensus that the challenges in this direction
are enormous. The UNDP's global Human Development Report (HDR) for 2006 ranks
India at 126 out of 177 countries, being lower by two compared with 2000. Reprioritisation
of expenditures towards social sectors and improvement in public service delivery
are essential. Higher public spending on social services, coupled with a focus
on quality, would improve the social infrastructure and provide productivity gains.
For the current growth momentum to be entrenched on a durable basis, there is
a need for a significant enhancement in capacity building and in the availability
of public services that cannot be adequately provided by the private sector. Fiscal
empowerment would allow higher outlays for boosting infrastructure and social
sector spending, which will have a beneficial impact on domestic productivity,
growth and employment. State Governments
There is evidence to suggest
that availability of funds is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for
tackling the problems of poverty, backwardness and low human development in India.
Successful implementation of development programmes also requires appropriate
policy framework, formulation of suitable plan schemes, and effective delivery
machinery on the part of funding Ministries/State Governments. The State Governments
in India are responsible for most public expenditures relating to the provision
of social services including health and education, as also most infrastructure
services except telecommunications, civil aviation, railways and major ports.
They are also responsible for law and order. The ability of the States to spend
on social services and infrastructure, thus, has important implications for the
overall economic development.
As widely documented, the deterioration in the fiscal position of States was reflected
in the decline in developmental expenditure of the States in the second half of
the 1990s compared with that during 1990-95, which had a significant deleterious
impact on the States’ social expenditures including education and health.
With active initiatives of the States towards fiscal correction and consolidation
in the recent period, there has been a reversal of the trend of developmental
expenditure and social expenditures as well. The State Governments in their budgets
for 2007-08 proposed higher allocations to social sector expenditure in order
to ensure improved quality of human resource development. In view of the priority
given to infrastructure development in the Eleventh Five Year Plan, the State
Governments have envisaged implementation of various projects, especially power
and roads. Many State Governments have proposed to implement the infrastructure
projects through the framework of public-private partnership (PPP) and development
of urban infrastructure under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission
(JNNURM).
Furthermore, it is found that the economically less developed States are also
the ones with low human development index (HDI) and economically better-off States
are found to have relatively better performance on HDI. However, the relation
between the HDI and the level of development does not show any correspondence
among the middle-income Indian States. For example, among medium-income States,
Kerala had high HDI, while Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal did not show high HDI
values. IV. Conclusion
The old paradigm of Indian development based on the active involvement of the
State for economic development and poverty removal, was used to justify intervention
in and entry of the State into every sphere of economic activity, gradually substituting
the position occupied by the private sector, co-operatives, individuals and social
groups. This was accompanied by a gradual but pervasive deterioration of governance,
as also distortions in the attitudes and operations of business, workers and farmers.
Though this deterioration started with specific areas of government operations
and specific regions of the country, it spread over almost every field of activity
in which Government was involved. This led to the end of the old paradigm and
the emergence of a new approach.
The new paradigm is based on a clear and non-ideological recognition of the strengths
and the weakness of the State and the people. A democratic society has enormous
potential for entrepreneurship, innovation and creative development. The people,
their perse forms of activity and association such as companies, co-operatives,
societies, trusts and other NGOs must be allowed and encouraged to play their
due role. The State must focus on what only it can do best and shed all activities
that the people can do as well or better. Economic theory also tells us that under
certain conditions market competition produces results that are the most efficient.
The State will have to manage the economy so as to accelerate employment and income
growth in a self sustaining manner, ensure that all citizens receive their entitlements
of basic public goods and services and empower the poor so that they have equal
rights (and responsibilities) with the better of citizens. Similarly given the
large infrastructure requirements of the country the public sector will have to
play a large role in providing infrastructure funding. The Government is actively
pursuing PPPs to bridge the infrastructure deficit and several initiatives have
been taken to promote PPPs in infrastructure development. The appraisal mechanism
of the PPP projects has been streamlined to ensure speedy clearance of the projects
removal of red tape adoption of international best practices and bringing uniformity
in guidelines. The awareness of concerns and issues relating to PPP however is
still lacking and not evenly spread across different states.
Decentralisation of
governance was ushered in the early 1990s through the 73rd and the 74th constitutional
amendments raising hopes for better delivery of public services, sensitive to
local needs. The argument in favour of decentralisation of planning is based on
the fact that as the distance between the action point at which information is
generated and the point at which decision is made increases, the information cost
increases. In the Indian case, the wide regional variations in natural endowments,
and levels of development, a single strategy may prove to be inappropriate justifying
decentralisation of the planning process. The advantage of decentralised planning
lies with the possibility of tapping local resources by ensuring greater participation
of the people in the development process given the possibility of centralized
planning and implementation machinery being delineated from the public.
Any new approach must correct the incentives for productivity and efficiency.
Laws, rules and procedures are such that they minimise the time and
money cost of compliance to relatively honest economic agents. Any process of
sustained economic reform and investment requires a framework of long-term policy
to which the Government can credibly commit itself. Reforms anywhere can be popular
if they are oriented to aspects of human development (education, health, child
nutrition, drinking water, women’s welfare and autonomy, etc.).
Reformers usually are preoccupied with problems of the foreign trade regime, fiscal
deficits, and the constraints on industrial investments, and they believe that
once these are handled right, trickle-down will take care of the issues that concern
the masses. In the age of financial globalisation, the Indian economy cannot remain
insulated from international developments. This makes it all the more important
that India adopts the right strategy and takes the right steps now to boost long-term
growth, and to fulfill its economic potential. To quote Governor Reddy: 'One of
the determining factors in India, for moving forward, would be the reforms in
governance, that are critical to strengthen State capacity to perform its core
functions more effectively and equitably. The business community has a vital stake
in the improvement of the quality of governance by empowering the public institutions,
since good governance can prevail only when public institutions function fairly
and efficiently'.
I wish the Seminar all success in its deliberations.
1 Inaugural Address by Smt. Shyamala Gopinath, Deputy
Governor, Reserve Bank of India at a seminar at the Indian Institute of Technology,
Mumbai on January 21, 2008. Assistance of Dr. G.S. Bhati, Anupam Prakash and Snehal
Herwadkar in preparing the speech is gratefully acknowledged. 2
Some Perspectives on the Indian Economy, Address by Dr. Y.V.Reddy,
Governor, Reserve Bank of India at the Peterson Institute for International Economics,
Washington D.C., USA on October 17, 2007. |