In The Media ⁽⁴⁰⁰⁾

The recent best seller titled Freakonomics by Steven Levitt, winner of 2003 Clark Medal awarded to the best American economist below forty years, has sparked the interest of economists in providing surprising explanations of the phenomena observed in everyday life. This column is about a similar surprising explanation of a relatively recent experience. Read full article Abstract: The recent best seller titled Freakonomics by Steven Levitt, winner of 2003 Clark Medal awarded to the best American economist below forty years, has sparked the interest of economists in providing surprising explanations of the phenomena observed in everyday life. For example, crime rates in the major US cities fell significantly during the 1990s. Most past analysts had attributed this decline to increased incomes, better employment opportunities, ageing population and improved enforcement.

In their reply (Dec 23, 2005), WDR authors Francisco Ferreira and Michael Walton question my critique. Among other things, they point out that whereas the WDR 2006 is concerned with equality of opportunity, my critique focused on equality of income. This is puzzling since the bulk of my critique focused on policies that impact opportunities directly, not just through income. Read full article (adapted on FT)

If we go by the latest census data, as late as 2001, 77 per cent of India's population lived in rural areas and 59 per cent earned its living from farming. Given farming generates less than a quarter of the national income, it offers a significant proportion of the farmers barely the subsistence income. I have argued for some time now that if India is to transform itself from this primarily agricultural to modern economy, it must walk on two legs: unskilled-labor-intensive manufacturing and skilled-labor-intensive services (Hindustan Times, 29 Jan 2006) If we go by the latest census data, as late as 2001, 77 per cent of India's population lived in rural areas and 59 per cent earned its living from farming. Given farming generates less than a quarter of the national income, it offers a significant proportion of the farmers barely the subsistence income. I have argued for some time now that if India is to transform itself from this primarily agricultural to modern economy, it must walk on two legs: unskilled-labour-intensive manufacturing and skilled-labour-intensive services. The former, which…

Thanks to a handful of vocal free-trade skeptics among economists, pro-free-trade economists never have to fear being rendered redundant. In a recent article in The Guardian (December 12, 2005), Larry Elliott writes that according to Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, the experiences of Vietnam and Mexico illustrate why liberal trade policies contribute precious little to economic prosperity. But like the other arguments against trade liberalisation by Rodrik, this one also appears plausible at first sight but collapses in the face of careful scrutiny Economic Times January 25, 2006 Thanks to a handful of vocal free-trade sceptics among economists, pro-free-trade economists never have to fear being rendered redundant. In a recent article in The Guardian (December 12, 2005), Larry Elliott writes that according to Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, the experiences of Vietnam and Mexico illustrate why liberal trade policies contribute precious little to economic prosperity. "Take Mexico and Vietnam, he [Rodrik] says. One...has had a free-trade agreement with its neighbour across the Rio Grande. It receives oodles of inward investment and sends its workers across the border in droves. It is fully…

(Full text and external link unavailable)