In The Media ⁽⁴⁰⁰⁾

Read full article Abstract: Economic reforms that helped produce sustained rapid growth during the last two decades have cut the proportion of the rural population living below the poverty line from 46 per cent in 1983 to 28 per cent in 2004-05. Nevertheless, 4.4 crore households (assuming five members per household) in rural India still live in abject poverty and must be provided relief while the growth process works its way to pull them out of poverty as well. This is the spirit in which the government launched the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) in February 2006. The scheme guarantees 100 days of employment to one adult in each rural household at the statutory minimum wage.

If emitters were to take mitigation, they could achieve reductions without denying poor in India prospects of humane existence.Read full article Abstract: I have been surprised by the number of reasonable Indians who have come to accept the proposition, advanced by equally reasonable but perhaps nationalistically-motivated Americans, that the acceptance of internationally-mandated restrictions on carbon emissions by India is in its own national interest. Some have even come to argue that India should actively seek a climate change treaty at the Copenhagen conference in December 2009. I disagree with this proposition. The foremost objective India must pursue in the forthcoming decades is to provide a humane existence with adequate access to basic amenities such as shelter, water and electricity to all citizens.

Read full article Abstract: During her recent visit to India, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to prepare the ground for the major negotiation on carbon emissions in Copenhagen in December by calling upon India to join hands with the United States to "combat global warming." Recognizing that Clinton was indirectly calling for India to accept mitigation commitments at Copenhagen, India's environment minister Jairam Ramesh reacted swiftly and sharply stating that his country was "simply not in a position to take on legally binding emissions [reduction] targets." Is India being self-righteous and risking its own interest, as the Financial Times and The New York Times claimed in the wake of the tough stance by Ramesh, or acting in self-interest while asserting its reasonable rights? A good case can be made in favor of the latter.

At Copenhagen, India should indicate to the US that it would not sign an unjust treaty permitting trade sanctions against other nations. Read full article During her recent visit, the US secretary of state Hillary Clinton forcefully urged India to contribute to carbon-emission reductions to combat global warming. India's environment minister Jairam Ramesh responded with equal force stating that emission caps would not cut ice in India. Widespread criticisms of this response in the western press notwithstanding, Ramesh is on a strong wicket when refusing to accept mitigation obligations. The push secretary Clinton has made for emission reductions by India partially reflects a switch in the US policy towards climate change under President Obama. The Congress, which has also come to be dominated by the Democratic Party following the November 2008 elections, reinforces this switch. Specifically, the House of Representatives recently passed the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Bill of 2009, which provides for a "cap and trade" program that would place an annual cap on the overall carbon emissions in the US.

President's address to Parliament has dashed any residual hopes that United Progressive Alliance II (UPA II) might use its clear-cut electoral victory to introduce systematic radical reforms. Yet reform advocates must persevere. Read full article The President's address to Parliament has dashed any residual hopes that the United Progressive Alliance II (UPA II) might use its clear-cut electoral victory to introduce systematic radical reforms. Yet reform advocates must persevere. There remain enough reforms 'in transition' that a series of incremental actions could still make a dramatic difference. Simultaneously, there is considerable scope for the introduction of radical reforms in the social sector to which the UPA accords high priority. Perhaps the single most important reform that the finance minister can safely push is the comprehensive Goods and Services Tax (GST). As Dr Vijay Kelkar, chairman, Thirteenth Finance Commission, noted in his brilliant address at the convocation at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, this reform promises vast benefits via improved productivity.