Economic Times ⁽²¹⁸⁾

It’s time for the government to reconsider its anti-poverty programmes. The subsidies can readily finance generous direct cash transfers, vouchers for primary education, and health insurance for the poor. Read full article Abstract:It's time for the government to reconsider its anti-poverty programmes. The subsidies can readily finance generous direct cash transfers, vouchers for primary education, and health insurance for the poor. There has been much confusion on the implications and desirability of the loan waiver programme announced by finance minister P Chidambaram in his 2008-09 Budget. There is need for clarity of thought so that each of us can arrive at an informed judgement on whether the proposal is a net plus or minus for India. My own bottom line is that given the daily hardships marginal and small farmers face, virtual absence of formal social safety nets, and 8-9% overall growth per year, the waiver is justified. At the same time, politicians on both sides of the aisle need to use the occasion for serious soul searching on devising the right policies to help the poor. Are repeated loan waivers the…

Giving a boost to trade liberalisation, rural road construction as well as targeted subsidies and better healthcare programmes are some of the measures even a populist budget can adopt to help the poor. Read full article There has been a remarkable sense of resignation on the part of the vast majority of those writing on the budget to be presented on Friday. The view is that this being the last full-term budget of the current UPA government, it will have to go for increased expenditures and tax cuts. But for those with true belief in reforms, this is an overly pessimistic scenario. There exist policy changes feasible even within the context of the populist stance of the government that can help the cause of the poor. Indeed, the finance minister has already announced one such measure outside the budget.

Read full article (adapted on Brookings) Abstract: Rural health care in India faces a crisis unmatched by any other sector of the economy. To mention just one dramatic fact, rural medical practitioners (RMPs), who provide 80% of outpatient care, have no formal qualifications for it. They sometimes lack even a high school diploma. In 2005, the central government launched the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) under which it proposed to increase public expenditure on health as a proportion of the GDP to 3% from 1%. But increased expenditure without appropriate policy reform is unlikely to suffice. Experience to-date inspires little confidence in the ability of the government to turn the expenditures into effective service. Rural India consists of approximately 638,000 villages inhabited by more than 740 million individuals. A network of government-owned and -operated sub-centres, primary health centres (PHCs) and community health centres (CHCs) is designed to deliver primary health care to rural folks.

Economic Times December 27 2007 The story of telecommunications reforms in India offers a fascinating example of how determined leadership can overcome even the fiercest opposition to reforms, says Arvind Panagariya The total number of phones in India as of October 31, 2007 is placed at 256 million. India has been adding phones at the rate of 6.65 million per month. Tele-density — the number of phones per 100 individuals — now stands at 22.52. As recently as March 31, 1999, this figure was a tiny 2.8. What has changed? Many public policy writers routinely attribute this revolution to the advent of cellular technology. While technological change has been an essential element, the real credit for the revolution must go to Prime Minister A B Vajpayee And finance minister Yashwant Sinha who brought the same systematic reforms to telecommunications that Prime Minster Narasimha Rao and finance minister Manmohan Singh had brought to trade and industry via an end to licensing. The story of telecommunications reforms offers fascinating example of how determined leadership can overcome even the fiercest opposition to reforms.

A billionaire is far more likely to invest his billion productively and use it for philanthropy than 1,000 millionaires. Read full article Abstract or Full text unavailable