Topic: 1991 reforms

Liberty is not accepted in India as the ultimate goal of political systems. This is why, for instance, there is so much paranoia about foreign investments, wrote economist Ashok V Desai in 1995.

At the panel discussion, Responsibility Response, artist Subodh Gupta said people in India often know art through celebrity and price tags, not through engagement or understanding.

In 'Demography, Representation, Delimitation', Ravi K Mishra draws on 150 years of census data to tackle myths about demography and delimitation.

Trump threatening to pull the trigger might be just what is needed to wake up India’s self-congratulatory establishment from its headline-managing fantasies.

In 1991, as in 2025, the report cards of these two economic trajectories remain underwhelming. But as economists see it, politics got in the way each time. 

Manmohan Singh’s success lay in making a decisive and historic shift towards the West. It was also audacious, in my book even more so than the 1991 reform, given how little support it had within Congress and UPA.

There are 3 perfectly timed triggers for this week's column: old, povertarian instincts are back; steel industry lobbying for more import duties; absence of reformers like AD Shroff.

After LPG, out-of-pocket expenditure on health facilities increased not only in absolute terms but also as a percentage of total health expenditure.

On 24 July 1991, finance minister Manmohan Singh presented the Union Budget for 1991-92 that changed the course of Indian economy. In his Lok Sabha speech, he quoted Victor Hugo to say, 'no power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come.'

Manish Sabharwal blames regulatory hurdles, lack of human capital development, and failure to transition from farm to non-farm sectors for India’s slower economic growth compared to China.