And so the fourth and final horseman is heading back across the Atlantic. Viral Acharya will soon follow in the retraced footsteps of Arvind Subramanian, Raghuram Rajan, and Arvind Panagariya. Media comment projects the country as the loser, but no one is alarmist in the way some were when Rajan headed back to Chicago. Nor does current comment reflect the extreme fears raised by Acharya in his famous speech about central bank independence. But then, neither do too many people reflect the view reportedly expressed by Arun Jaitley as finance minister, that one of the mistakes the Modi government made was to import economists from abroad.
Let’s be clear: The country IS the loser when it loses top-flight economists. But before we come to that, consider the possibility that experts can be wrong. Acharya’s academic qualifications and expertise in central banking are widely acknowledged, but he does have to answer questions on his record at the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). On his watch, the RBI’s macro-economic analysis has been wrong on the inflation rate as well as the economic growth rate — over-estimating both. Flowing from those misjudgments, he has been wrong also in his advocacy of interest rate policy, opposing two of the recent rate cuts announced by the RBI.
There is the question of cultural fit. Foreigners doing business with Indians find that Indians don’t say “no” when they disagree, preferring to shift ground or resort to indirect signalling. That’s unlike in the US, say, where you are expected to bluntly say “no” if that is your position. Similarly, those within the Indian government system do not speak out publicly against the government they serve. When you are governor or deputy governor, you do not have the freedom of speech that an ordinary citizen enjoys. Differences are aired only internally.
On the occasions when someone feels the need to start a public debate, it is not done in apocalyptic terms. Naturally, when Rajan and Acharya spoke out bluntly (in the case of the former, on issues with which he was not officially concerned), it did not go down well. And yet, on the one issue (demonetisation) on which one might have expected Rajan to take a stand, he became a homegrown Indian: He advised against, then went along.
Still, it was not a mistake to hire these economists. Rajan’s determination to clean up banking led to the asset quality review, which exposed the extent of the hidden rot. Next, while it is no secret that Rajan and his deputy (later successor) Urjit Patel did not get along, it was under Rajan that Patel formulated a policy framework for the RBI, making inflation control the primary goal of monetary policy. This reflected international thinking on the issue, but was contrary to the view of previous, homegrown governors like Y.V. Reddy and Bimal Jalan. Still, monetary policy has been recast.
We are deeply grateful to our readers & viewers for their time, trust and subscriptions.
Quality journalism is expensive and needs readers to pay for it. Your support will define our work and ThePrint’s future.
In the finance ministry, Arvind Subramanian’s many policy prescriptions were usually ignored by the government despite his strenuous advocacy. But his report on the modal rate for the goods and services tax did get indirect acceptance, while his opposition to multiple rates has found partial purchase after his departure. Subramanian has also been recognised for raising the quality of analysis in the government’s annual Economic Surveys. But after his recent questioning of the official growth numbers, he must be persona non grata.
At the NITI Aayog, Arvind Panagariya came early and left two years ago. He did not get as much face time with the Prime Minister as he may have expected, perhaps because his reformist thinking on macro-economic policy was tangential to the approach of the Modi government, which has been more interested in programmes and projects, and in specific issues like how to reform medical education. The NITI Aayog played its part here, but Panagariya’s big ideas like coastal economic zones have not materialised.
Today, with growth having slowed and macro-economic challenges in every direction, would the government have benefited from the advice of “Harvard” economists? Perhaps, but judging by past record, it probably would not have paid much heed.
News media is in a crisis & only you can fix it
You are reading this because you value good, intelligent and objective journalism. We thank you for your time and your trust.
You also know that the news media is facing an unprecedented crisis. It is likely that you are also hearing of the brutal layoffs and pay-cuts hitting the industry. There are many reasons why the media’s economics is broken. But a big one is that good people are not yet paying enough for good journalism.
We have a newsroom filled with talented young reporters. We also have the country’s most robust editing and fact-checking team, finest news photographers and video professionals. We are building India’s most ambitious and energetic news platform. And we aren’t even three yet.
At ThePrint, we invest in quality journalists. We pay them fairly and on time even in this difficult period. As you may have noticed, we do not flinch from spending whatever it takes to make sure our reporters reach where the story is. Our stellar coronavirus coverage is a good example. You can check some of it here.
This comes with a sizable cost. For us to continue bringing quality journalism, we need readers like you to pay for it. Because the advertising market is broken too.
If you think we deserve your support, do join us in this endeavour to strengthen fair, free, courageous, and questioning journalism, please click on the link below. Your support will define our journalism, and ThePrint’s future. It will take just a few seconds of your time.