by Rakesh Mohan
12. Pankaj Chandra, ‘Governance in Higher Education: A Contested Space’, in Indian Higher Education, edited by Devesh Kapur and Pratap Bhanu Mehta (New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, forthcoming).
13. Source: http://presidentofindia.nic.in/president-visitor.htm.
14. Brandon Alcorn, Gayle Christensen and Devesh Kapur, ‘Higher Education and MOOCs in India and the Global South’, Change, May–June 2015.
Chapter 20: Healthcare in India: A Fork in the Road
1. The authors would like to acknowledge inputs and contributions from Lighthouse Health Solutions; Malini Bhattacharya, Devaki Singh (Evalueserve); Hari Menon, Rahul Mullick, Jack Langenbrunner, Katherine Hay, Gabrielle Stern, Alkesh Wadhwani (Gates Foundation); Priyabalu (PHFI) and Amarjeet Sinha (Government of India) to this paper.
2. MMR data extrapolated from UNICEF, http://data.unicef.org/maternal-health/delivery-care.html#; all other data extrapolated from World Development Indicators, World Bank.
3. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
4. Sharma et al., 2008.
5. Sagar, 2014.
6. World Development Indicators, World Bank, 2014.
7. Data is between 2004–14, in Ravi et al., 2016.
8. Ravi et al., 2016.
9. Hammer and Spears, 2013.
10. IHME, 2013.
11. Public health expenditure increased from 1 per cent to 1.4 per cent of GDP during this period. It hit a low of 0.98 per cent of GDP in 2002. Data from World Development Indicators, World Bank.
12. Mor, 2015.
13. Patel et al., 2015; Nagarajan et al., 2015; Paul et al., 2011.
14. Paul et al., 2011.
15. IHME, 2016.
16. Venkatanarayanan, 2015.
17. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
18. BRICS Countries include Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
19. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
20. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
21. Reddy and Qadeer, 2010.
22. Sengupta and Nundy, 2005.
23. Radwan, 2005.
24. Ravi et al., 2016.
25. NSSO 71st Round (2014).
26. Mor, 2015.
27. Berman et al., 2010.
28. IRDA Annual Report 2014–15, IRDA. IRDA defines non-government as group and individual, which are health insurance policies underwritten by non-life/stand-alone health insurers on commercial lines.
29. Estimate for 2014. Calculation based on GDP estimate from World Development Indicators, World Bank; average annual exchange rate from IRS; and total premiums from IRDA Annual Report 2014–15.
30. ESIC Press Release, December 2015.
31. Ravi et al., 2016 uses MOHFW data.
32. Estimate for 2014. Calculation based on GDP estimate from World Development Indicators, World Bank; average annual exchange rate from IRS; and government premiums from IRDA Annual Report 2014–15 (Table 1).
33. Reddy et al., 2011.
34. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
35. National Sample Survey, 60th round, National Sample Survey Organization (New Delhi: Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, 2005), found in Marten et al., 2014.
36. Marten et al., 2014.
37. Selvaraj and Karan, 2012.
38. Evans et al., 2012, found in Tangcharoensathien et al., 2014.
39. Mor, 2015.
40. Sen, 2016.
41. Balakrishnan et al., 2014.
42. ‘WHO Statement on Caesarean Section Rates’. World Health Organization, 2015. Identifies that when the caesarean section rate goes above 10 per cent, it is associated with reduced maternal and neonatal mortality.
43. Suicide rate is measured per 100,000 population. Data obtained from the National Crime Records Bureau.
44. State/Union Territory-wise rate of accidental deaths in 2014, National Crime Records Bureau.
45. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
46. Tangcharoensathien et al., 2014.
47. Estimate for 2014. Calculation based on GDP estimate from World Development Indicators, World Bank; average annual exchange rate from IRS; and government premiums from IRDA Annual Report 2014–15.
48. Mor, 2015.
49. Tatar et al., 2011.
50. Velasco-Garrido et al., 2005.
51. Velasco-Garrido et al., 2005.
52. Velasco-Garrido et al., 2005.
53. Vasan and Lagomarsino, 2014.
54. Muralidharan et al., 2011 (data from 2003 all-India survey).
55. Mor, 2016.
56. Rao et al., 2012.
57. World Development Indicators, World Bank.
Chapter 22: Liberalizing Indian Capital Markets: Highly Successful Reforms and an Unfinished Agenda
1. Shuheb M. Khan and Ramkrishna Reddy, research associate and research assistant respectively at ICRIER, have provided the numbers for the Tables.
2. Under Section 15K of the SEBI Act, SEBI’s orders could be challenged in the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT).
3. In demutualized stock exchanges, ownership, management and broker dealerships are segregated from each other.
4. Bimal Jalan et al., ‘Review of Ownership and Governance of Market Infrastructure Institutions’, Securities and Exchange Board of India Committee Report, November 2010.
5. Source: http://www.bain.com/Images/BAIN-REPORT_India_Private_Equity_Report_2015.pdf.
6. SEBI Annual Report 2013–14.
7. Acharya, ‘Corporate Bond Market in India: Issues and Challenges’, Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers 32, no. 3 (2011).
8. This is lower than the 38.2 number in Table 5 for 2014–15 because the 35 per cent figure in Table 6 only includes bonds and excludes all government bills and borrowings with initial maturity of one year or less.
9. ‘Corporate Rescue in India: The Influence of Courts’, Legal Research Paper Series: Paper No. 37/2014 of July 2014, University of Oxford.
10. Budget Speech 2016–17, 40 and 45, http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/bs/bs.pdf.
11. ‘Revision of Investment Guidelines for NPS schemes’, PFRDA/2014/PFM/1, 29 January 2014.
12. Internationally, the three exchanges that have the highest trading volumes in commodity derivatives are the New York Mercantile Exchange (energy and metals), Dalian Commodity Exchange in China (corn and soya bean) and Chicago Board of Trade (agriculture and precious metals).
13. Source: RBI/2012-13/366 IDMD.PCD.No.10 /14.03.04/2012-13.
14. Source: http://www.cbi.gov.in/fromarchives/harshadmehta_nw/harshadmehta.php
15. Badla is a modified version of Contango, which was allowed on the London Stock Exchange till about 1980.
16. ‘Badla’, SEBI glossary.
17. Shah and Susan, ‘Policy issues in the Indian securities market’, IGIDR, 2001.
18. Bhattacharya et al., ‘Stability of the Day of the Week Effect in Return and in Volatility at the Indian Capital Market: A GARCH Approach with Proper Mean Specification’, Applied Financial Economics 13, no.8 (2003).
19. Thomas, ‘Ban on Badla, Take 2’, Economic Times, 29 June 2001, http://www.igidr.ac.in/susant/MEDIA/ban-on-badla-2.html.
20. JPC report, 117.
21. Extract from the finance minister’s Budget speech of 2002–03: ‘Badla trading has been banned and practically all trading of stocks is now in the rolling settlement mode. Exchange-traded derivatives have become wider with a greater choice of instruments and deeper in terms of liquidity. Individual stock optio
ns and index stock options were introduced in July 2001, and individual stock futures in November 2001.’
22. Sarkar, ‘Indian Derivatives Markets’, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2006, https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/economists/sarkar/derivatives_in_india.pdf.
23. ‘Recent Trends in Capital Market’, Address of T.M. Nagarajan, full-time member at the meeting of ICSI, ICAI and ICWAI at Madurai, 12 April 2004.
24. ‘Joint Committee on Stock Market Scam and Matters Relating Thereto’, JPC 1 (2002).
25. ‘Action Taken Report on the Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Stock Market Scam and Matters Relating Thereto’, Ministry of Finance, 9 May 2003.
26. ‘Reserve Bank Cancels the License of Madhavpura Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd., Ahmadabad (Gujarat)’, Reserve Bank of India press release, 7 June 2012.
27. ‘Congress Demands JPC Probe into UTI Scam’, The Hindu, 3 August 2001, http://www.thehindu.com/2001/08/03/stories/01030009.htm.
28. ‘UTI Panel to Implement JPC Report’, Economic Times, 24 December, 2002, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/banking/finance/uti-panel-to-implement-jpc-report/articleshow/32184781.cms?prtpage=1.
29. Rohin Saran and V. Shankar Aiyar, ‘Politics of Trust’, India Today, 13 August 2001, http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/uti-crisis-political-parties-use-and-abuse-indias-largest-mutual-fund/1/230936.html.
30. SEBI, Securities and Exchange Board of India (Collective Investment Schemes) Regulations, 1999.
31. Source: http://www.hindustantimes.com/business/sebi-sahara-case-how-it-all-began/story-u0G51dtoU5yP1nD3ZFjGuJ.html.
32. ‘10 Things You Need to Know about Sahara Row’, Business Standard, 28 February 2014, http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-sahara-row-114022600863_1.html.
33. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/subrata-roy-undertakes-in-supreme-court-to-pay-rs-1500-crore-before-june-15/articleshow/58397101.cms.
34. Arun Jaitley, minister of finance, Budget Speech 2016–2017, 29 February 2016.
35. N. Sundaresha Subramanian, ‘Insiders Everywhere, Impossible to Catch’, 25 October 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/article/markets/insiders-everywhere-impossible-to-catch-112102500060_1.html.
36. Appu Esthose Suresh, ‘Spat between Abraham, SEBI, Finance Ministry’, Mint, 30 August 2011, http://www.livemint.com/Home-Page/PMTWqVYfSelMtfulp8A0pL/Spat-between-Abraham-Sebi-finance-ministry-gets-murkier.html.
37. Budget Speech 2016–17, 40 and 45, http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2016-17/bs/bs.pdf.
38. John Kay, ‘Other People’s Money—the Real Business of Finance’, 2015.
39. ‘NSE Will Appoint Auditor to Probe Unfair Access Claims’, Mint, 23 September 2016.
40. ‘Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: The Role of Credit Rating Agencies’, United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 23 April 2010, 2–13.
Chapter 24: Changes and Challenges: Corporate India since 1991
1. In November 1993, eight industrialists (Bharat Ram, Lalit Thapar, Hari Shankar Singhania, M.V. Arunachalam, B.K. Modi, C.K. Birla, Rahul Bajaj and Jamshyd Godrej) delivered a note to Manmohan Singh. It welcomed competition in the product markets, but obliquely urged the government to take steps to enable Indian businesses to play their rightful role in India’s industrial development—a shorthand for putting a brake on entry of foreign companies and on tariff cuts. Thankfully, the government did not take this too seriously. See Bhupesh Bhandari, Business Standard, 8 July 2011.
2. There is no doubt that consolidated financial statements provide better accounting information than stand-alones.
3. RONW is PAT divided by net worth (paid-up equity capital plus free reserves).
4. Public Enterprises Survey, 2014-15, Government of India, Department of Public Enterprises (DPE), Vol. 1, 4.
5. Ibid., 18.
6. Ibid., 188–89.
7. V.R.S. Cowlagi, ‘The National Renewal Fund: Promise, Performance and Prospects’, Vikalpa 19, no.4: 7.
8. Ibid., 9–10.
9. Ninth Five-Year Plan, Government of India, The Planning Commission, Vol. 2, chap. 5, paragraph 5.8.
10. Omkar Goswami, ‘Generating Employment’, in Getting India Back on Track, edited by Bibek Debroy, Ashley Tellis and Reece Trevor (Random House, 2014), 91–92, using data from the Planning Commission, planningcommission.nic.in/data/datatable/2504/databook_84.pdf.
The data are based on the sixty-first round (2004–05) and sixty-sixth round (2009–10) of the National Sample Survey Organization, under Government of India, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.
11. Ibid., 93–96.
Chapter 25: Animal Spirits : Stray Thoughts on the Nature of Entrepreneurship in India’s Business Families after Liberalization
1. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an international agreement administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation as applied to nationals of WTO Members.
Chapter 26: India’s National Innovation System: Transformed or Half-formed?
1. For a lower-middle income labor-surplus country.
2. A study independently carried out by Moses Abramovitz and Robert Solow.
3. Although the contribution of technical change to economic growth is well appreciated, it is still calculated as the residual in Total Factor Productivity calculations, after subtracting the contribution of capital and labor.
4. The concept of National Innovation Systems is derived from books by Richard Nelson (1993) and Bengt-Åke Lundvall (1992).
5. Total global R & D in nominal terms for 2014–15 was calculated using nominal GDP data from the IMF World Economic Outlook Database, April 2016, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2016/01/weodata/index.aspx; GERD as a percentage of GDP from UNESCO Institute for Statistics, UIS.stat, http://data.uis.unesco.org/. The figure for total industrial R & D was obtained from the EU Industrial R & D Investment Scoreboard (2015). Figures in euros were converted to dollars using the EUR–USD exchange rate of 1.21 as of 31 December 2014, as mentioned in the EU Industrial R & D Investment Scoreboard.
6. EU Industrial R & D Investment Scoreboard (2015); Centre for Technology, Innovation and Economic Research.
7. The term ‘Newly Industrializing Countries’ almost always includes the eight countries of Table 1 plus Malaysia and Indonesia. Turkey, South Africa and Hong Kong are also often included and, on occasion, Chile, Argentina, Colombia, Egypt and Vietnam.
8. There is a difference in many countries between who funds and who does research. In most major economies, the State funds the bulk of research undertaken in universities, whether public or private. In some economies like the US, Israel and the UK, the State also funds a substantial part of the defence research expenditures of private industry. In India, there is essentially no gap between who funds and who does research: publicly funded research is done in government laboratories (overwhelmingly) or in government higher-education institutes (to a minor extent). Private industry funds the great bulk of its own R & D.
9. There is a serious problem with Indian R & D statistics. No government agency can provide overall data. The Centre for Technology, Innovation and Economic Research estimates that if we include contract R & D done in India for foreign firms in total, the R & D share as a percentage of GDP would rise to 1.2 per cent, with the public and industry shares at fifty-fifty and the industry share, in turn, splitting roughly equally between R & D done for use within the country and as contract R & D that is exported.
10. Department of Science and Technol
ogy, India (various years).
11. OECD Statistics (1991), OECD.Stat, http://stats.oecd.org/.
12. See, in particular, the late Stephen Kline’s many insightful attacks on the linear model: Stephen Kline, ‘Research, Invention, Innovation and Production: Models and Reality’, Report INN-1C, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, 1987; and Stephen Kline, ‘Models of Innovation and their Policy Consequences’, Report INN–4, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, 1989.
13. David Hounshell, ‘The Evolution of Industrial Research in the United States’, in Engines of Innovation: U.S. Industrial Research at the End of an Era (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996).
14. Richard Nelson, ‘The Role of Firms in Technical Advance’, in Technology and Enterprise (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 175.
15. Keith Pavitt, ‘The Social Shaping of the National Science Base’, Research Policy 27 (1998): 800.
16. See, in particular, the work of Nathan Rosenberg, Richard Nelson, Keith Pavitt and Paul David, and, in particular, Nathan Rosenberg and Richard Nelson, ‘American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry’, Research Policy 23 (1994): 323–48; Richard Nelson, ed. National Innovation Systems (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993); Keith Pavitt, ‘The social shaping of the national science base’, Research Policy 27 (1998): 793–805; Paul David, ‘From Market magic to calypso science policy: A review of Terence Kealey’s The Economic Laws of Scientific Research’, Research Policy (1998): 229–55; and OECD (1992 and 1999).
17. See Keith Pavitt, ‘The social shaping’.
18. My most telling example is that of Great Britain. Britain was a net importer of technology throughout its heyday as the world’s workshop (on exhibit at the Crystal Palace in 1853). It was only in the latter half of the 19th century that Britain became a net exporter of technology, at about the time that relative industrial decline set in.
19. See Kochhar et al., ‘India’s Pattern of Development: What Happened, What Follows?’, Working Paper WP/06/22 (Washington: International Monetary Fund, 2006), 22. This paper is worth reading both for its outstanding content and for the co-authors, including Raghuram Rajan and Arvind Subramanian. Note also that the China comment reflects when the paper was written, in 2006. Today, ten years later, as wages have risen, Chinese industry has become more skill-intensive and we see the investment in R & D we discussed earlier.
