TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface to the Fifth Edition Preface to the First EditionAbout the Civil Services Examination

1. INTRODUCTION

1. PROGRESS, GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

1. EVOLUTION OF THE INDIAN ECONOMY

1. ECONOMIC PLANNING

1. PLANNING IN INDIA

1. ECONOMIC REFORMS

1. INFLATION AND BUSINESS CYCLE

1. INDIAN AGRICULTURE

1. INDIAN INDUSTRY & INFRASTRUCTURE

1. INDIA AND THE GLOBAL ECONOMY

1. INDIAN FINANCIAL MARKET

1. BANKING IN INDIA

1. INSURANCE IN INDIA

1. SECURITY MARKET IN INDIA

1. EXTERNAL SECTOR OF INDIA

1. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC ORGANISATIONS & INDIA

1. TAX STRUCTURE IN INDIA

1. PUBLIC FINANCE IN INDIA

1. THE TECHNOLOGY-ENVIRONMENT DILEMMA

1. SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE: INDIA AND THE WORLD

1. PREPARING FOR THE DEMOGRAPHIC DIVIDEND

1. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN INDIA

1. MODEL ANSWERS TO SELECTED QUESTIONS

1. ECONOMICS CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGIES ECONOMIC SURVEY 2012-13 RAILWAY BUDGET 2013-14

UNION BUDGET 2013-14 CENSUS-2011

20SUSTAINABILITYAND CLIMATECHANGE: INDIA AND THE WORLD

... Introduction... International Collaboration and Efforts... Discussions under G 20... Financing Climate Change... Problems & Prospects... Epilogue

INTRODUCTION

Improving living standards for mankind has been the single minded goal of all nations and world bodies. After defining development in numerous ways for over two decades, there seems to be a consensus on Human Development. While a large popnlation on the earth is still to get the bare minimum for development, humanity is at the crossroads where it is faced with the first of its kind challenge the challenge of climate change. The dilemma is that whatever we can do for our development, there has to be a repercussion on nature. An even bigger dilemma is in achieving a global consensus on how to check or restrict and finally reverse the process of climate change.We may consider the year 2012, arguably, a high water mark in the field of environment and sustainable development initiatives. The global community met at the UN Conference on Sustainable Development that took place in Rio in June 2012, also marking the 20th anniversary of the first Earth Summit held in 1992. The Conference reviewed the progress made, identified implementation gaps, and assessed new and emerging challenges, which resulted in a political outcome called the The Future We Want . In India, the Twelfth Five Year Plan was launched with a focus on sustainable growth. This along with sustainable development policies and programmes which are being followed signalled to citizens at home and the world at large that India is committed to sustainable development with equal emphasis on its three dimensions - social, economic, and environmental.A survey of the global comparative opinion shows that people in India and indeed all countries, have a marked and rising concern about sustainable development and climate change (cited by the Economic Survey 2012-13). However, the challenges are also formidable, especially in the context of finding the matching resources of the required magnitude given the economic conditions. Climate science has rightly taken up an important position in the public debate. Even as the science of climate change grapples with uncertainties, the world is witnessing more extreme events. The urgency for action is felt more than ever before. In contrast, though the Doha, Gateway on climate change in December 2012 agreed upon a multilateral and rule-based regime to reduce emissions, the emission pledges on the table by the developed countries lacked ambition. Now the Fifth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is in the final stages of completion. With rising extreme events, and rising citizen demand, the world has little option but to listen to the voice of evolving science and respond adequately with strategies and policy rooted in the principles of multilateralism with equitable and fair burden sharing.1T h e Economic Survey 2011-12, for the first time, introduced a new chapter the Sustainable Development and Climate Change. These topics remained headline news with extreme weather events both at home and abroad. Efforts to arrive at a consensus on what to do at home and abroad gathered momentum, even as they sailed through some rough waters and fickle seas in many respects. In 2012, science and nature voiced a sense of urgency for action. Yet the relevant statistics have a mixed story to tell. It strongly accepts science but weakly reflects on the corresponding multilateral actions, suggesting that a lot remains to be done on the latter. Till the world stops to introspects and accepts that we are a product of the ecological surrounding we are living in, there seems no durable outcome from the international deliberations.

Climate Change at a Glance

Since the industrial revolution, manmade activities have added significant quantities of greenhouse gases (GHG)2 into the atmosphere. Climate change is a global negative externality primarily caused by the building up of GHG emissions in the atmosphere. The efforts needed to address the climate change include mitigation of GHG emissions on the one hand, and building of adaptive capacities to cope with the adverse impacts of climate change on the other. From a developing country perspective, adaptation is of utmost importance as they are the ones who are most vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change.The incremental impact of a ton of GHG on climate change is independent of where in the world it is emitted. These emissions impose a cost on both the present and future generations, which are not fully recouped from the emitters of these emissions. This formed the starting point for a globally coordinated policy action and the need for an international climate change negotiating regime. UNFCCC, set up in 1992, although global in scope, differentiates the commitments/responsibilities of Parties on the basis of historic responsibilities, economic structures, and on the basis of the principle of equity and CBDR which is at the core of the climate change debate.The largest share of historical and current global emissions of GHGs has originated in developed countries. Scientists attribute the global problem of climate change not to the current of GHG emissions but to the stock of historical GHG emissions. Most of the countries, particularly the industrialised countries, having large current emissions are also the largest historic emitters and the principal contributors to climate change. The Convention therefore lays down legally binding commitments for the developed countries, taking into account their historical responsibilities and also squarely puts the responsibilities on developed countries for providing financial resources, including for the transfer of technology, needed by the developing countries. The Convention also acknowledges that climate change actions taken by developing countries are contingent on the resources made available to them.

A volatile mix of erratic weather, natural disasters, and enormous pressure on the availability of clean air, water, and energy together with the problems of poverty and hunger continues to be of great concern for policymakers particularly in the developing countries. There was building of the forward momentum both globally and domestically with three high-profile events in the global arena in 2012 and launch of the Twelfth Five Year Plan at home. The Earth Summit in Rio also popularly known as Rio + 20 celebrated its 20th anniversary, next the 11th session of the Conference of Parties ( COP 11 ) to the Convention on Bio Diversity (CBD), hosted by India in Hyderabad, and finally the year closed with the 18th session of the COP to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Doha in December. These international collaborations came out with balanced packages though short on ambition but proceeding on efforts. At home, we launched the Twelfth Five Year Plan whose explicit theme was a faster, more inclusive and sustainable growth process. It is the first time that a five year plan has sustainability as a prominent focus. The Twelfth Plan outlined lower carbon growth strategies adding momentum to the ongoing policies and programmes of the government on environment and climate change. To add to this, State Action Plans on Climate Change (SAPCC), a recent initiative, will tune national initiatives on the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) to regional, socio- economic and ecological conditions. The SAPCC is expected to take off as part of the plan scheme for states. With these developments, it is clear that sustainable development and climate change issues are being addressed on a priority basis.The world population crossed the 7 billion mark but with continued decline in population growth rates. Urbanisation continues to grow with more demand for resources. A United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) study, Keeping Track of Our Changing Environment: From Rio to Rio + 20 (1992- 2012), tells the story of where the world collectively stands today on the sustainability and environment front. According to this study, both global gross domestic product (GDP) and the human development index (HDI increased by 2.5 per cent per year) continue to increase but variation and inequalities between regions still exist. The study also points to the growing pressure on agriculture, water, fisheries, and land resources. Pressure on natural resources reflected in per capita global use of natural resource materials has increased around 27 per cent between 1992 and 2005 though there has been a decline in emissions and energy and material use per unit of output, indicating improvement in efficiency levels. At the same time, global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have continuously been rising. GHG emissions measured in MtCO2 e (million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) from 1990 to 2005 register an increase of 25.9 per cent (World Resources Institute).Positive and rising trends in global efforts are competing against mixed trends.In 2011, global investment in the renewable energy sector, went up 17 per cent to $257 billion hitting another record. In terms of new capacity added in 2011, renewable power (excluding large hydro Electrical project) accounted for 44 per cent of the total new generation capacity added worldwide; up from 34 per cent in 2010 (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management Global Trends in Renewable Energy investment 2012).The global community is now working upon a set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) possibly to be integrated with Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for the post 2015 global policy architecture. Simultaneously the world in the past decade has entered into many new environmental agreements. Along with the governments also the private sector has been forthcoming. However, multilateral and bilateral funding dedicated to environmental purposes fluctuated and was faced with unmet promises to a great extent.

Sustainable Development and Climate Change in the Indian Context

In the past two decades, the key environmental challenges in India have been sharper. The State of the Environment Report by the MoEF clubs the issues under five key challenges faced by India 1. Climate Change,2. Food Security,3. Water Security,4. Energy Security, and5. Managing Urbanisation.Climate change is disturbing the natural ecosystems and is expected to have substantial adverse effects in India, mainly on agriculture (on which 58 per cent of the population still depends for livelihood), water storage in the Himalayan glaciers which are the source of major rivers and groundwater recharge, sea-level rise, and threats to a long coastline and habitations. Climate change will also cause increased frequency of extreme events such as floods, and droughts. These in turn will impact Indias food security problems and water security. As per the Second National Communication submitted by India to the UNFCCC, it is projected that the annual mean surface air temperature rise by the end of the century ranges from 3.5 0 C to 4.3 0 C, whereas the sea level along the Indian coast has been rising at the rate of about 1.3 mm/year on an average. These climate change projections are likely to impact human health, agriculture, water resources, natural ecosystems, and biodiversity.

SAPCC (State Action Plans on Climate Change)

After the NAPCC was launched3, there have been serious efforts to dovetail national programmes of action to regional and local levels consistent with varying socio-economic and ecological conditions. At the Conference of State Environment Ministers held on 18 August 2009, the Prime Minister of India requested all state governments to prepare SAPCCs. The State Action Plans took their lead from National Mission documents while formulating mitigation/ adaptation strategies. So far, 21 states have prepared documents on the SAPCC focused on approaches that are sectoral but with regional ramifications. The State Action Plans include strategies and a list of possible sectoral actions that would help the states achieve their adaptation and mitigation objectives. The common threads that bind these State Plans together are the principles of territorial approach to climate change, sub-national planning, building capacities for vulnerability assessment, and identifying investment opportunities based on state priorities. This framework provides a broad, systematic, and step-wise process for the preparation of SAPCCs and advocates a participatory approach so that states have enough ownership of the process and final plan. The major sectors for which adaptation strategies envisaged are agriculture, water, forests, coastal zone, and health.

Concerned of the threats imposed by climate change and pressures on natural resources, sustainability and environment are increasingly taking centrestage in the Indian policy domain. India has been part of 94 multilateral environmental agreements. India has also voluntarily agreed to reduce its emission intensity of its GDP by 20-25 per cent over 2005 levels by 2020, and emissions from the agriculture sector would not form part of the assessment of its emissions intensity. Indian economy is already moving along a lower carbon and sustainable path in terms of declining carbon intensity of its GDP which is expected to fall further through lower carbon strategies. It is estimated that Indias per capita emission in 2031 will still be lower than the global per capita emission in 2005 (in 2031, Indias per capita GHG emissions will be under 4 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2 eq.) which is lower than the global per capita emissions of 4.22 tonnes of CO2 eq. in 2005).Together with the national efforts in different sectors, India also recognises that rural areas are equally prone to stress and pressures from natural resource exploitation. In this context, schemes for rural development and livelihood programmes are very relevant. A vast majority of the works under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS) are linked to land, soil, and water. There are also programmes for non- timber forest produce-based livelihood, promotion of organic and low-chemical agriculture, and increased soil health and fertility to sustain agriculture-based livelihoods. These schemes help mobilise and develop capacities of community institutions to utilise natural resources in a sustainable manner and their potential can be further developed.Along with efforts to incorporate sustainability in the rural development process, India is increasingly making efforts to integrate the three pillars of sustainable development into its national policy space. In fact, environment protection is enshrined in our Constitution (Articles 48 A and 51 A [g]). Various policy measures are being implemented across the domains of forestry, pollution control, water management, clean energy, and marine and coastal environment. Some of these are policies like Joint Forest Management, Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment, Coastal Zone Regulation Zone, Eco Labelling and Energy Efficiency Labelling, Fuel Efficiency Standards etc. Over a period of time, a stable organisational structure has been developed for environment protection. The country has been making fast progress in increasing its renewable energy capacity and has displayed the fastest expansion rate of investment of any large renewables market in the world in 2011, with a 62 per cent increase to $12 billion (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management Global Trends in Renewable Energy investment 2012). The 12th Plan with a prominent focus on sustainability makes provision and provides for many more opportunities like these.Working on the social and economic pillars (sustainable development policies, programmes and targeted schemes) have been introduced to eradicate poverty either through a direct focus on economic indicators like employment generation, youth mobilisation, and building up assets of the poor; or indirectly through social indicators of human development with emphasis on health, education, and womens empowerment. As per the Census-2011, many parameters on this front have shown improvement, however, India is still not on target to meet some key MDGs by 2015. The poverty head-count ratio declined by 7.3 percentage points from 2004-5 to 2009-10; The MMR (maternal mortality rate) dropped from 301 per 100,000 live births in 2001-3 to 212 in 2007-9; and literacy rates have been constantly rising and are estimated to be 82.14 per cent for men and65.46 per cent for women.Over the years, arguments in favour of looking beyond the conventional measure of GDP and taking into account the environmental damage caused by production of goods and services received attention. An expert group under the chairmanship of Prof Sir Partha Dasgupta has been set up to develop a framework for Green National Accounts for India. In fact, the Central Statistics Office (CSO) under the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation (MOSPI) has been publishing comprehensive environment statistics since 1997. The process of putting in place a system for natural resources accounting was initiated by MOSPI way back in 2002.

Sustainable Development and Lower Carbon Strategies of the 12th Plan

The Twelfth Plan strategy4 suggests that there are significant co-benefits for climate action with inclusive and sustainable growth. India as a large responsible player with very low income has also to ensure that these efforts are matched by equitable and fair burden sharing among countries, taking into account the historical responsibilities for emissions. These issues are being discussed in the UNFCCC.Indias approach to a lower-carbon growth strategy explicitly recognises that policies have to be inclusive and differentiated across sectors according to national priorities, so as to lower the transaction costs of implementing the policy, and conform with a nationally fair burden-sharing mechanism. An Expert Group on Low Carbon Strategies appointed by the Planning Commission has outlined the lower carbon strategies for major potential carbon mitigation sectors.1. Power: On the supply side, adopt super-critical technologies in coal-based thermal power plants; use gas in combined heat and power systems; invest in renewable technologies; and develop hydropower in a sustainable manner. On the demand side, accelerate adoption of super-efficient electrical appliances through market and regulatory mechanisms; enhance efficiency of agricultural pump sets and industrial equipment with better technology; modernise transmission and distribution to bring technical and commercial losses down to world average levels; universalise access to electricity; and accelerate power-sector reforms.2. Transport: Increase the share of rail in overall freight transport; improve the efficiency of rail freight transport; make it price competitive by bringing down the levels of cross-subsidisation between freight and passenger transport; complete dedicated rail corridor; improve share and efficiency of public transport system; and improve fuel efficiency of vehicles through both market-based and regulatory mechanisms.3. Industry: Greenfield plants in the iron and steel and cement sectors adopt best available technology; existing plants, particularly small and medium ones, modernize and adopt green technology at an accelerated pace, with transparent financing mechanisms.4. Buildings: Evolve and institutionalise green building codes at all levels of government.5. Fore stry: Green India Mission to regenerate at least 4 million ha of degraded forest; increase density of forest cover on 2 million ha of moderately dense forest; and overall increase the density of forest and tree cover on 10 million ha of forest, waste, and community lands.

Despite all these efforts, the reality that confronts us on the environmental front continues to be harsh and complex. Increasing population, urbanisation, and growing demand for water and land resources have severely impacted the quality and availability of water and soil resources. Rising energy needs is another area of concern. Besides, rapid growth will require corresponding growth in energy supply.Presently, a large share of our energy demand is met through coal and oil and this trend will continue, given the unprecedented surge in energy demand and resource constraints. Energy issues become more complex with existing energy poverty and rise in energy prices. There is considerable scope for increasing efficiency in the use of energy and water in India together with other development indicators like infant mortality rate, MMR, sanitation facilities, and public health services. Economic instruments, regulatory measures, and market mechanisms can play an important role in helping to achieve development and growth in a sustainable manner.

INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION AND EFFORTS

Admitting the well-founded concerns on the need to redress environmental problems, there were global calls for cooperation, action, and innovation. World leaders in 2012 continued to engage and deliberate in international forums dedicated to climate and environment and also in forums like the G20 where sustainable development and climate change were an integral part of the discussions. Ambition or goal setting to reach targets, provision of finance and technology for developing countries, and institutions and mechanisms for capacity building were the common threads of negotiations running through all these forums. Some of the high-profile events which the world was watching are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Rio + 20

The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), was held in June 2012, at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, (also known as Rio+20) and was attended at the heads of states level. The objective of the Rio+20 Conference was to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable development, review progress made and identify implementation gaps, and assess new and emerging challenges since the UNCSD held 20 years ago in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Towards the end, the Conference had two themes 1. Green economy in the context of sustainable development & poverty eradication; and2. Institutional framework for sustainable development.The most significant outcomes of the Rio Summit have been the restoration of the principles of equity and of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) in the global environmental discourse and placing poverty eradication at the centre of the global development agenda. The outcome also ensures the required domestic policy space to countries on a green economy and launched four processes/ mechanisms, i.e. developing SDGs, financing strategy, technology transfer, and defining the format and organisational aspects of the proposed high- level political forum to follow up on the implementation of sustainable development.Fairness as an issue received attention. It is a matter of satisfaction and achievement for India that the Rio outcome document reaffirms equity and the principle of CBDR among other Rio principles. India together with other developing countries played an instrumental role in this. CBDR is especially important for developing countries, as it implies that while all countries should take sustainable development actions, the developed countries have to take the leading role in environmental protection, as they have contributed the most to environmental problems. Also they should support developing countries with finance and technology in their sustainable development efforts. India has always held that the eradication of poverty should be the overarching goal of sustainable development. This was given due recognition in the deliberations at the Rio Summit and in the outcome document.On the issue of Green Economy, the outcome document affirms that there are different approaches, visions, models, and tools available to each country, in accordance with its national circumstances and priorities, for achieving sustainable development. It identifies green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication as one of the important tools for achieving sustainable development but specifies that while it could provide options for policy-making it should not be a rigid set of rules. The outcome document clearly states what green economy policies should result in and what they should not. It is a matter of satisfaction that the document firmly rejects prescriptive policies, unilateral measures, and trade barriers as well as unwarranted conditionality on ODA (Official Developmental Assistance) in this context.The Rio+20 Conference will also be remembered for kick-starting the process on developing SDGs. The SDGs would address and incorporate in a balanced way, all the three dimensions of sustainable development and their inter-linkages. The SDGs would be universal, global, and voluntary. Since the SDGs are expected to become a part of the post-2015 UN development agenda, they would hopefully guide the international community towards inclusive sustainable development.From Indias point of view, SDGs need to bring together development and environment into a single set of targets. The fault line, as ever in global conferences, is the inappropriate balance between environment and development. Developing countries do not want any bindings on their efforts towards poverty eradication or any agreement that comes with such a price tag. Therefore, we could also view the SDGs and the post 2015 agenda as an opportunity for revisiting and fine-tuning the MDG framework and sustainably regaining focus on developmental issues. India and many developing countries are slow or off track in achieving targets under some of the MDGs, which have concrete areas of overlap between environment and development. This is another reason why these MDGs should continue to be a part of the post 2015 global policy architecture.5The Rio Summit did not lead to any specific commitments on the finance and technology front. The developed countries, having obligations and responsibilities, need to commit to provision of adequate public funds including for transfer of technology and capacity building to developing countries. There has been no mention of provision of new and additional financial resources by developed countries, something that India would have wanted to see. Any new green economy and sustainable development goals would be meaningless without new money and technology commitments on the table. Nevertheless, we may hope that the follow up process of Rio + 20 on both finance and technology will keep these issues alive leading to some new strategies and mechanisms.While developing countries remain disappointed with the outcome document on means of implementation, they managed to secure many of their key positions and demands in the negotiations. It says a lot about the current international situation that a reaffirmation of principles made 20 years ago is a sign of success. Convention on Biological Diversity 12.22 Global concerns about biodiversity found expression in the CBD adopted in 1992. The objectives of the Convention are: conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The Convention has near universal membership with 193 countries. The USA is the only major country that is not a part of it. Following the ratification of the CBD, India also enacted the Biological Diversity Act in 2002 and notified the Rules in 2004 to give effect to the provisions of the CBD.Being committed to the cause, India successfully hosted the COP 11 to the CBD, and the sixth Conference of the Parties serving as Meeting of the Parties (CoP/MoP-6) to the CBDs Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in Hyderabad from 8-19 October 2012. The event provided India an opportunity to consolidate, scale up, and showcase its initiatives and strengths on biodiversity. One of the most important outcomes is the commitment of the Parties to doubling the total biodiversity- related international financial resource flows to developing countries by 2015 and at least maintaining this level until 2020. This will translate into additional financial flows to the developing countries to the tune of about US $ 30 billion over the next eight years.The Prime Minister of India, during COP 11 announced Indias ratification of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing under the CBD and also launched the Hyderabad Pledge of US $ 50 million during Indias Presidency to strengthen institutional mechanisms and capacity building in developing countries. The Prime Minister unveiled a commemorative pylon in Hyderabad to mark COP- 11. It has been decided to establish a biodiversity museum and a garden on this site. At national level, efforts will be made to strengthen the implementation of the Biological Diversity Act and provide support to the State Biodiversity Boards and at local level prepare Peoples Biodiversity Registers. Doha Climate Change Conference 2012.The 18th session of the COP to the UNFCCC, that started on 26 November and concluded on 8 December 2012 in DOHA, Qatar has resulted in a set of decisions (clubbed together as Doha Climate Gateway) aimed at advancing the implementation of the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol (KP). The key issues for the Doha conference were i. Amending the KP (Kyoto Protocol) to implement the second commitment period under the Protocol;ii. Successfully concluding the work of the BAP (Bali Action Plan) within which there was urgent need for a clear path to climate finance; andiii. Planning the work under the DP (Durban Platform) for enhanced action.The Conference addressed all three issues and came out with a package which balanced the interests and obligations of various countries.At the Doha Conference, the three issues of equity, technology-related IPRs, and unilateral measures raised by India resounded in the decisions. These outstanding or unresolved issues under the BAP are now part of the planned or continuing work of various bodies of the Convention. At Doha, India also ensured that no hasty decision was taken on aspects related to mitigation in agricultural sector at global level as agriculture is a sensitive sector for developing countries. The Conference has explicitly recognised that the action of Parties will be based on equity and CBDR including the need for equitable access to sustainable development. The Conference also recognised that issues relating to global peaking that could place a cap on emissions of developing countries and restrict their development space were controversial and best avoided at this stage of development. At the same time, in an effort to cater to the interest of all countries and come up with a balanced package, some elements of the package required compromise or deferral. In many cases, ambitious and strong demands were collectively made by developing countries, but in the act of balancing, countries were made to accept the mellowed down and subtle versions of their demands. Among the key concerns which the Conference could not address were those relating to financing commitments of developed countries and sectoral actions. No specific targets for mid-term financing (2013-2020) were adopted. While the Conference stopped short of giving a mandate to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) or International Martine Organisation (IMO) to initiate steps for curtailing emissions in their respective sectors, the absence of a decision on sectoral framework for such actions has left open the possibility of such actions being initiated in such sectors by the respective international organisations. considering the fact that some of the leading members of ICAO prefer a global market based mechanism to be the vehicle of such actions, the framework and the principles on the basis of which such actions will be taken are likely to be a bone of contention for quite sometime.Also, despite vociferous demand from vulnerable countries, there could be no satisfactory agreement on a compensation mechanism for loss and damage resulting from climate change.

KEY DOHA OUTCOMES

Important outcomes at the Doha Summit may be summarised as follows: 1. It has been agreed that the KP, as the only existing and binding agreement under which developed countries commit to cutting emissions of GHGs, will enter a second commitment period that will run for eight years.2. Governments have agreed to speedily work toward a climate change agreement under DP applicable to all countries from 2020, to be adopted by 2015. Further governments have decided to find ways to scale up efforts before 2020 to meet the gap in global ambition for emissions reduction.3. Governments have launched a robust process to review the long-term temperature goal. This will start in 2013 and conclude by 2015 and is a reality check on the advance of the climate change threat and the possible need to mobilise further action.4. The Work Programme on Long term Finance launched last year has been extended for another year to contribute to the ongoing efforts to scale up mobilisation of climate finance. Developed countries have reiterated their commitment to deliver on promises of mobilising US$100 billion both for adaptation and mitigation by 2020.5. Decision also encourages developed countries to increase efforts for providing finance between 2013 and 2015, and at least to the average annual level provided during the 2010- 2012 fast-start finance period.6. Finance pledges of about $ 6 billion for period upto 2015 announced by Germany, the UK, France, Denmark, Sweden and the EU Commission.7. The selection of the Republic of Korea by the Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to host the GCF has been endorsed.8. The unresolved issues of Technology-related Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) and the Unilateral Measures under the BAP are now part of the planned or continuing work of various bodies of the Convention. Based on the decisions, the Technology Executive Committee (TEC) will initiate exploration of issues relating to enabling environments and barriers, including IPRs in its future work-plan. The TEC has already identified IPRs as one of the key messages on which further work is necessary. Similarly, a decision has been taken for facilitating discussion on the issue of unilateral measures under the existing forum on implementation of response measures.Source: Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 261.

On the positive side, the Doha Conference succeeded in carrying out amendments to the KP to ensure a second commitment period. The second commitment period will last for a period of eight years as of 1 January 2013. This decision has ensured that there will be no gap between the first commitment period under the KP ending on 31 December, 2012, and the second one commencing on 1 January, 2013. With the exception of Russia, New Zealand, Japan, and Canada, all other countries that were part of the first commitment period entered into the second round, with some new countries joining as well. It has been agreed that the KP Parties will revisit their targets in 2014 with a view to increasing their ambition.The emission reduction obligations undertaken by the KP Parties are not as ambitious as required by science; however, they provide a relative degree of certainty to the carbon markets. The EU will reduce its emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 compared to 1990 (Table 12.1). Governments also agreed to speedily work under the DP to evolve a new set of arrangements for mitigation commitments and actions applicable to all countries from 2020, and to adopt it by 2015. In a significant and positive advancement, it has been agreed that the work of the DP will be based on the principles of the Convention.

CO2 Emissions of the G 20 Countries

CO2 being the predominant GHG, an analysis (of the World Bank) of its emissions across countries in per capita terms in 2009, compared to 2005 presents an interesting picture. Although the G20 is referred to as a group, there are stark disparities on the ground between member countries in terms of incomes, stages of development as well as respective per capita CO2 emissions. In 2005 the USA had the highest CO2 emissions in metric tons per capita at 19.7, followed by Australia (18.0). the lowest per capita emitters in 2005 were Brazil (1.9), Indonesia (1.5), and India (1.2) who continued to be the bottom three in 2009 as well. In 2009, Australia ranked first within the G20, followed by the USA.Source: Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 262.

DISCUSSIONS UNDER G 20

G20the group of twenty major economies of the world took up the agenda of inclusive green growth during the Mexican Presidency in 2011-12. The aim of introducing inclusive green growth into the G20 agenda was to support the transition of developing countries, in particular the low income countries, towards becoming lower carbon economies as well as to enable countries to become more resilient to climate change. As of now, the G20 ministers have agreed to voluntarily self-report in 2013 on their respective countrys efforts to follow inclusive green growth and sustainable development policies under their structural reform agendas. Leaders at the G20 last year also collaborated to form a Climate Finance Study Group to consider ways of effectively mobilising resources taking into account the objectives, provisions, and principles of the UNFCCC.

FINANCING CLIMATE CHANGE

The idea of a global budget for carbon and its corresponding financing stems from the objective of stabilising the GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. There has already been a 0.8 0 C increase in global mean temperature. It is widely believed that we are fast approaching the 20 C temperature rise within which the global community is striving to limit itself. This indicates that only a small and fast closing window of opportunity exists for the international community to take actions and ensure that we avoid reaching this point.Yet the question remains that how to finance actions to achieve this target6. A UNFCCC paper (2007) estimated a requirement of US$ 200-210 billion in additional annual investment in 2030 to return GHG emissions to current levels. Further, additional investment needed worldwide for adaptation was estimated to be annually US$ 60-182 billion in 2030. However, with the passage of time and inadequate action, these estimates are being revised upwards. Most recent estimates presented at the UNFCCCs workshop on Long-term Finance (July 2012), point to an even more enormous scale of funds, in the range of $600-$1500 billion a year, that would be needed by developing countries for mitigation and adaptation. This amount is at least 5-10 times the prospective financing flows of US$100 billion per year by 2020 agreed upon as the goal under the UNFCCC. Representatives from the International Energy Agency reported at this workshop that annual global investments for power generation alone, in a 2 0 C temperature rise scenario, would involve $370 billion from 2010 to 2020; $630 billion between 2020 and 2030; and $760 billion between 2030 and 2050.

Domestic Resources and Mechanisms

The UNFCCC (The latest available data of actual emissions available is upto 2010 only) notes that Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Malta, and Belarus did not have reduction commitments for 2008-2012 under the KP. Canada, Japan, New Zealand and Russia are not Parties to the second commitment period to the KP (Kyoto Protocol): Countries that are undergoing the process of transition to a market economy. For any representative country say for Australia, the table shows that in the first commitment period, Australia could collectively increase emissions by 8 per cent between 2008-2012 (taking the base year as 1990), whereas for the second KP round, Australia would need to reduce its emissions by 0.5 per cent collectively between 2013- 2020. The last two columns of the table measure progress towards the first KP target which shows that Australias actual emissions increased by 30 per cent between 2008-10. This indicates that for the period between 2010-2012, Australias emission should have been reduced by 22 per cent for it to be within the target.

CARBON TAXES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUBSIDIES

A recent study Preliminary Modeling Studies on Carbon Taxes and GDP Loss was conducted by the Ministry of Environment and Forest, GoI. The results of the study are given as below Undiscounted cumulativeGDP loss: Carbontax is revenue positive when it involves no adjustment to other tax rates in the economy. It is revenue neutral when other tax rates are adjusted so that the revenue inflow from carbon tax is exactly balanced by an equal reduction in yields from reduced taxes.

GoI Expenditure on Environment Promoting Subsidies

Environment-promoting Subsidies Exp. in 2008-09 (Rs. crore)Sewerage & sanitation1236.06Soil & water conservation26.04Fisheries221.52Forestry & wildlife696.36Agricultural research & education365.11Special areas development prog.1560.29Flood control & drainage175.28Non-conventional energy477.21Ecology & environment473.80Total5231.67

Source : A Technical Paper on Environmental Subsidies in India: Role and Reforms by the Madras School of Economics (January 2012), as quoted by the Economic Survey 2012-13, p. 264.

The assessment and quantification of the costs of adaptation and mitigation is a difficult task. However, it is clear that these costs are significant and will likely be higher in the future as initiatives are taken in line with the goals outlined in the NAPCC. The preliminary estimates indicate a sum of 230,000 crore to fulfill the mission objectives under the NAPCC alone, let alone other lower carbon strategies and environment policies and programmes of the government.The most obvious source of financing for climate change action is government budgetary support. Most of it would come as sectoral finance since some of the resources for adaptation and mitigation are built into the ongoing schemes and programmes. Although mitigation is sometimes an important co-benefit, the deployment of resources for such purposes is largely guided by the overall availability of resources. The Finance Bill 2010-11 created a corpus called the National Clean Energy Fund (NCEF) out of a cess at the rate of Rs.50 per tonne of coal to invest in entrepreneurial ventures and research in the field of clean energy technologies. The government expects to collect Rs. 10,000 crore under the NCEF by 2015. Governments have a range of policy instruments and variables at their disposal to use for generating the enormous resource requirements in this field. This includes a set of price signals, direct and indirect taxes, subsidies, and export and import levies. Theoretically, environment- related taxes have an important role to play in funding green initiatives. At the same time, any government must use these policy tools after serious consideration and analysis as they may have serious repercussions on other sectors of the economy. Preliminary modelling studies by the Ministry of Environment and Forests indicate that even a modest revenue-neutral economy-wide Carbon tax of US$10 per ton of GHG emissions in India would result in a GDP loss of around US$ 632 billion at 2005 prices. At the same time, the government continues to use subsidies to promote the environment.Carbon taxes and subsidy may not be relied solely as the most viable policy option. Therefore, India is experimenting with a careful mix of market mechanisms together with fiscal instruments and regulatory interventions. On one hand, where the cess on coal is a type of carbon tax being levied in India, PAT (Perform Achieve and Trade) and RPO (Renewable Purchase Obligation) are examples of cap and trade market mechanisms promoting energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy respectively in India.The Twelfth Plan, in the particular context, lower carbon strategies will require capital finance for improvements in technology and enhanced deployment of renewable and clean energy technologies. Some of these objectives may be met through regulatory interventions and use of market mechanisms, in which case the required budgetary support may be small. In other cases, adequate financial outlays will be needed to implement policies and measures that can achieve specific mitigation outcomes in the individual sectors. So far, three grants of Rs. 5,000 crore each, for forest cover, renewable energy, and the water sector, have been recommended by the 13th Finance Commission for the state governments.Considering the large resource requirement, arguments in favour of setting up a National Green Fund to finance public and private sector projects/ activities aimed at protecting environment in accordance with the Twelfth Plan objectives have found support. The Fund could also be a vehicle for receiving international support through agreed bilateral and multilateral sources and can finance actions not only at national level but also at state level for agreed priorities and thrust areas.Carbon offsetting and its requisite financing require global effort and process. Markets that are operating take signals from international negotiations. Domestic markets and mechanisms alone are neither sufficient for generating resources of the required scale nor efficient enough for reaching the set level of targets and therefore rely heavily on international policy architecture. The second commitment period of the KP has brought some respite and certainty to the carbon markets; however, due to lack of ambition the future of carbon markets could still be in an indeterminate state. Indias actions for climate change will, therefore, need to be financed from a pool of resources consisting of domestic resources, international carbon finance, and multilateral funds.

International Sources and Issues

India, primarily out of its own concerns, has chalked out ambitious plans and policies to tackle climate change and environment issues that reflect Indias strong will to address this global public good. However, given the scarcity of resources and competing demands, finding the matching resources is a challenge. The Expert Group on Low Carbon Strategies has also stated in its Interim Report that aggressive mitigation cannot be achieved without substantial international financial support, both in terms of financial resources and technology transfer. The Indian PM also echoed similar sentiment in his Rio+20 Summit speech: Many countries could do more if additional finance and technology were available. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence of support from the industrialised countries in these areas.

PAT and RPO

The PAT (perform - achieve - trade) is a scheme for trading energy-efficiency certificates in large energy-intensive industries under the National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency Identified industries are required to improve their specific energy consumption (SEC) within the specified period of three years or face penalty provisions. At the same time this mechanism facilitates efficient industries to trade their additional certified energy savings (that go beyond the assigned target) with other designated consumers who could use these certificates to comply with their SEC-reduction targets. In the Twelfth Five Year Plan, the PAT scheme is likely to achieve about 15 million tonnes oil equivalent of annual savings in coal, oil, gas, and electricity (including 6.686 million ton of oil-equivalent energy savings of first phase).Similarly,the RPO (Renewable Purchase Obligation) is creating domestic markets for renewable energy through regulatory interventions at state level. The RPO is the minimum level of renewable energy (out of total consumption) the obligated entities (DISCOMs, Captive Power Plants, and Open Access Consumers) are entitled to purchase in the area of a distribution licensee. The obligation is mandated by the State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC). Since the renewable energy sources are not evenly spread across India, SERCs cannot specify a linear level of RPOs for all states. Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) under the RPO mechanism is an instrument that enables the obligated entities to meet their Renewable Purchase Obligation by trading surplus or deficit RECs among themselves with the owner of the REC being able to claim to have purchased renewable energy.Source: Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 265.

In the context of making finances available to developing countries, in the recent past, much of the talks under the UNFCCC revolved around two numbers, namely US$ 30 billion between 2010 and 2012 as FSF (Fast Start Finance) and US$ 100 billion annually by 2020 as long-term finance. These were the two finance figures that the developed world collectively pledged as climate change finance in 2009. These pledges need to be new and additional. The term new and additional in the context of provision of finances by developed countries can be traced right from the text of the Convention to various COP decisions. In this sense new and additional refers to provision of financial resources that represent new commitment, rather than those that are diverted from flows that have already been earmarked for some other form of development assistance.However, in the absence of an agreed definition of additionality in climate finance, the developed and developing countries have diverging views. In the backdrop of these differences, together with great uncertainty in finance flows, complex web of channels, and lack of transparency and reporting practices, the actual additionality on FSF turned out to be a matter of great contention (given below in the box). These differences more recently led to demand from developing countries on the need for a mechanism to MRV (measure, report, and verify) climate finance flows.

Assessing the US$ 30 Bil ion FSF Commitment (2010-2012)

Many studies echoed serious concerns on the way FSF was implemented, at the time the FSF came to an end in 2012. There are lessons to be learnt so that these issues are addressed when we implement long-term finance by 2020. As a part of the FSF assessment, an Oxfam study The Climate Fiscal Cliff reveals five numbers that speak for themselves on the delivery of funds under FSF i. Only 33 per cent of FSF appears to be new money;ii. Only 24 per cent of public finance was additional to existing aid promises;iii. Only 21per cent went for supporting adaptation in spite of promises to balance it with mitigation;iv. Only 43 per cent was provided as grants and the rest as loans; andv. Only 23 per cent was channeled through multilateral funds.Almost all assessments on FSF point to the core problems as being (a) that it was recycled money either diverted from ODA or made up of funds delivered or planned before the Copenhagen promise in 2009; (b) that the most vulnerable were not prioritised, with minimal funds spent on adaptation and (c) net transfer of resources to developing countries was not even half the amount promised as more than 50 per cent was in the form of loans that have to be repaid. Therefore, an important takeaway in the context of the long-term finance flows are lessons on transparency, coherence, and consistency in reporting and verifying climate finance flows.Source: Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 266.

As a part of the finance package in the Doha Conference, the MRV of finance was an important element of the deal. It is satisfying that elements of MRV will be taken up by the Standing Committee on Finance under the COP. The Committee will consider ways of strengthening methodologies for reporting, measuring, and tracking climate finance. Talking about other finance elements, the Conference did not take ambitious or meaningful decisions especially on the demand for finance for the period between 2013 and 2020. The final decision encourages developed country Parties to increase efforts for at least maintaining the average annual 2010-2012 level of finance between 2013 and 2015. On the other hand, it is reassuring that the work programme on long-term finance started in COP17 in Durban has been extended with a view to continuing discussion on likely sources of finance in the long term. To sum up, finance negotiations and outcomes at Doha were in the nature of small slow steps rather than big strides.Simultaneously, there have been efforts to build the requisite infrastructure for enabling and facilitating the flows of climate finance under the Convention. This is because only scaling up of finance will not suffice. The money should be put to efficient use and generate results. To this effect, work on operationalising the GCF progressed. The Republic of Korea has been selected as the host country to house its secretariat. The GCF is expected to be instrumental in channelling a significant share of the US$ 100 billion expected annually to be mobilised to developing countries by 2020 for addressing climate change. The vision, structure, and strategy of the Fund to carry out its function are a crucial priority on the agenda of the GCF Board. The Board should not rush with the standard solutions sometimes proposed by outside interests but focus on ultimate goals and results on the ground with accountability and transparency.Meanwhile, there are other Funds under the UNFCCC which continue to function. Collectively, the climate focal area of Global Environment Facility (GEF), the Special Climate Change Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund, and the Adaptation Fund disburse around less than US$ 1 billion per year (Report on the workshop of the work programme on long-term finance 2012). The GEF, which is also an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC like the GCF, provides project grants for addressing global environmental issues while supporting national development initiatives. Till date, India has accessed about US$ 438 million of GEF grant of which US$ 269.5 million is for projects under the climate change focal area. At the same time, the CIF (Climate Investment Fund) a collaborative effort among the multilateral development banks is offering its funds to be used for climate action on the basis of agreed terms and conditions. India has agreed in principle to accessing the CIF, provided it is not treated as part of the climate change finance flows under the Convention and no GHG emission reduction related conditionalities are associated with the funds. The Trust Fund Committee in May 2012 has approved the allocation of the first tranche amounting to US $ 263 million for four projects contained in Indias Investment Plan.

Carbon Markets and Private Sector

Visible disappointments with the Doha outcomes on finance, many observers warned that we are heading towards a climate fiscal cliff. In this context, the private sector and global carbon markets are being increasingly emphasised. While not sufficient in themselves, the private sector and carbon markets have shown significant potential in mobilising finance for climate change especially for mitigation action.As per the UNFCCC report on long-term finance, of the estimated current international climate financial flows, US$ 55 billion per year was generated from the private sector. Likewise, carbon markets help developing countries to find financial resources to proceed on their sustainability efforts. The CDM (the KPs market mechanism) as the worlds largest carbon market has helped mobilise more than US$ 215 billion collectively so far in investments in developing countries (CDM Policy Dialogue Report). India has been an active player in the CDM, with over 2000 projects having been accorded host country approval, which has the potential of facilitating an overall inflow of approximately US $ 7.07 billion if all the projects get registered.Both these sources, at the same time, have serious limitations in terms of predictability and adequacy of flows. It is absolutely clear that they will not deliver on the hardest things: equity, public goods, and adaptation such as climate resiliency in agriculture or offgrid distributed renewables for poor regions. They will instead prove useful for market- led goods and services for the better, such as grid-based solar and wind power, where public subsidies in one form or another will be demanded. Also private sector investment is guided by risk return. This explains the strong inclination of the private sector towards mitigation projects. Adaptation financing continues to be a concern for all developing countries with insignificant private participation as adaptation usually does not yield returns on investment.Carbon markets on the other hand are volatile, where success is contingent on the level of collective mitigation of ambition of nations. The end of the first phase of the KP saw the CDM market collapsing with carbon prices declining around 70 per cent in the past year alone. Moreover, unilateral restrictions imposed by the authorities in some of the major carbon markets such as EU on carbon credits from major developing countries such as India have not helped matters. The prices of carbon credits are likely to remain in a trap until the global ambition improves and new market mechanisms emerges to take into account the pledge based emissions. Both the carbon markets and private money need clear and targeted signals from public policies to address the institutional and market barriers confronting them.

PROBLEMS & PROSPECTS

Though multilateral efforts on sustainable development and climate change have led to several positive outcomes, there are still areas of concern where further work is needed to safeguard the interests of developing countries in future deliberations. Some of the challenges and deliverables from Indias point of view are i. Follow up and action on the Rio + 20 outcome document, and the four processes/mechanisms that were as part of it, especially on developing SDGs and the processes on the financing strategy and technology transfer.ii. Taking forward the climate change discussions at Doha, the key question to be addressed is to articulate equality in the evolving arrangements that will be applicable to all in the post 2020 period. We have to ensure that domestic goals continue to be nationally determined even as we contribute to the global efforts according to the principle of CBDR and respective capabilities.iii. Taking concrete decisions on the sectoral framework for such actions closing the possibility of both unilateral measures and actions being initiated in sectors by the respective international organisations like ICAO or IMO on their own.iv. Equity, fair burden sharing, and equitable access to global atmospheric resources have to be protected and addressed more adequately under the DP, India will have to fight for its fair share of carbon and development space.The sources and channels of providing long-term finance by developed countries have not yet been clearly identified. With no certainty on funding in the coming years, it is absolutely necessary to expeditiously mobilise finance and provide initial capital to the GCF for its operations.Based on historic emissions and responsibilities, developed countries should take the lead. However, according to a June 2011 Study7 , developing countries are pledging greater cuts in their GHG emissions than developed countries.India is also proactive in this regard with its intentions and ambition firmly in place in its policies and programmes. One may rightly argue that with the Twelfth Plans focus on environmental sustainability, India is on the right track with the right enabling environment and has a number of achievements to its credit. However, the challenge while India is growing is to identify the key drivers and enablers of growth be it Infrastructure Transportation sector Housing, or AgricultureAnd finally, to make the above-given sectors grow sustainably. This leads us to the next and most vital issue of finding and raising new and additional resources for meeting economic well-being needs with greater environmental sustainability. More often, it is the resource crunch which is the stumbling block for developing countries like India. While it makes efforts to efficiently and expeditiously bring price signals and other policy instruments into play, India could do much more if new and additional finance and technology are made available through multilateral processes.Be it national or global, environmental decline and global warming occurred gradually over decades and centuries, picking up pace with time. We must remember that the clock is now ticking on the needed global action to combat and contain this decay. This action should be fair, just and equitable for all countries so that our future has ecological and economic space for sustainable development for all.8Moreover, mankind is faced with a situation when, by all means, it develops and selects the kind of technologies which have the minimum or least fallouts on our eoclogy and environment in the process of promoting the cause of mankinds development. Absence of global concensus cannot be cited by the individual nations as a refuge to sit idle and continue in the mode of business as usual. Before it is too late, the conscience of humanity must awaken from its inertia.

EPILOGUE

Hardly anything makes economic sense unless its continuance for a long time can be projected without running into absurdities.9 Growth and development can happen to a limited objective, but it cannot be stretched upto an unlimited extent. How can the finite earth support mankinds infinite physical needs? long before this was postulated by the Club of Rome in 1972, exactly the same thing Gandhiji had said in late thirties itself, Earth provides enough to satisfy every mans need, but not for every mans greed. Mankind needs to introspect not only about its present needs but the way those needs are bieng met.Besides, we also need to differentiate between our needs and aspirations. Our physical needs have a direct link with the resources we have at our disposal to meet them. If mankind is to survive and prosper, we need to be aware of the repercussions of our activities on Mother nature.

1. Oliver Morton in Me gachange : The World in 2050, edited by Daniel Franklin & John Andrews, The Economist, London, 2012, pp. 92-1102. Megachange: The World in 2050, op. cit., pp. 94-96.3. NAPCC, Ministry of Forest & Environment, GoI, Final Draft March 31, 2011, N. Delhi.4. Twelfth Five Year Plan 2012-17, Planning Commission, GoI, N Delhi, 2012.5. Economic Surve y 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 259.6. Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 262.7. Stockholm Environment Institute, Comparison of Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 pledges under the Cancun Agreements, as cited by the Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 268.8. Economic Survey 2012-13, MoF, GoI, N. Delhi, p. 268.9. These virtuous opinions can be seen in a number of contemporary thinkers and writers since 1970s:E. F. Schumacher, The Economics of Permanence , Resurgence, Volume 3, No. 1, May/June 1970, (reprinted in Robin Clarke, Editior, Notes for the Future: An Alternative History of the Past Decade , Thames & Hudson, London, 1975). Schumacher invoked Gandhi while advocating for the economics of permanence. Jeffery Sachs, Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Earth, Penguin Books, Great Britain (GB), London, 2009, pp. 29-35, 55-155. Jeffery Sachs, The End of Poverty, Penguin Books, GB, London, 2005, pp. 280-284. Tim Harford, The Undercover Economist, Abacus, GB, London, 2006, pp. 90-104.Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat, Penguin Books, GB, London, 2006, pp. 383-385, 495-504 Ramachandra Guha, The Ecology of Affluence in The Ramachandra Guha Omnibus, Oxford University Press,N. Delhi, 2005, pp. 69-97.

21PREPARING FOR THE DEMOGRAPHIC DIVIDEND

IntroductionServices not CreatingComparing Growth and TradeEnough JobsReasons Behind Less Creative JobsNeed of Formal ApprenticeshipsImpediments to Business Growth Way to Evidence-Based Labour RegulationsBetter PolicyInformality of Employment in India Way to PolicyThe Mauritian MiracleCautions to Preparedness

INTRODUCTION

As the developed world is in the process of greying and are heading for a crunch in the working population, nations with growing population in the working age-group see this as an opportunity to employ their surplus manpower in there nations. In case of India, the situation has been considered to be highly favourable by international as well as Indian experts. But these are mere aspirations. To reap real diridends, we need to provide the required quality to the quantity of our population. We need to strengthen our human resource development capabilities keeping in mind the future requirements. Only then the dividend of demography will be in Indias favour.The Economic Survey 2012-13, on the Indias prospects of garnering demographic dividend, says, Policymakers are usually focused on short-run economic management issues. But the short run has to be a bridge to the long run. The central long-run question facing India is Where will good jobs come from? Productive jobs are vital for growth. And a good job is the best form of inclusion. More than half our population depends on agriculture, but the experience of other countries suggests that the number of people dependent on agriculture will have to shrink for per capita incomes in agriculture to go up substantially. While industry is creating jobs, too many such jobs are low productivity non- contractual jobs in the unorganized sector, offering low incomes, little protection, and no benefits. Service jobs have relatively high productivity, but employment growth in services has been slow in recent years. Indias challenge is to create the conditions for faster growth of productive jobs outside agriculture, especially in organised manufacturing and services, besides improving productivity in agriculture. The benefit of rising to the challenge is decades of strong inclusive growth.

Optimism vs Pessimism

Experts with optimistic views are confident in Indias demographic dividend because of the fact that Indias dependency ratio, as measured by the share of the young and the elderly as a fraction of the population, will come down more sharply in the coming decades. More working age people will mean more workers, especially in the productive age groups, more incomes, more savings, more capital per worker, and more growth. Also, because demographic change is associated with fertility declines, the transition period may be accompanied by greater female participation in the labour force1.As per the IMF, every fast-growing Asian economy in recent years has accelerated as it underwent a demographic transition. In India2 itself, the high growth states (Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Gujarat) in the period 1991-2001 had a dependency ratio which was 8.7 percentage points lower than that of the low growth states (Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh) and an average annual growth rate that was 4.3 percentage points higher. Looking ahead, the low growth states will benefit more from the demographic dividend, as higher incomes and lower fertility alter demographics. Indeed, over the period 2001-11, the hitherto laggard states have grown at an average of around 5 per cent annually. The difference between their growth and that of the leaders in the period 2001-11 is just 1.5 percentage. So demographic transition seems to be correlated with growth, with some reasons to believe that causality flows both ways i.e., lower dependency ratios increase growth and higher growth reduces fertility and consequently dependency ratios.These optimists point to another reason for cheer. Cross-country evidence suggest that productivity is an increasing function of age, with the age group 40-49 being the most productive because of work experience3. Nearly half the additions to the Indian labour force over the period 2011-30 will be in the age group 30-49, even while the share of this group in China, Korea, and the United States will be declining. That India will be expanding its most productive cohorts even while most developed countries and some developing countries like China will be contracting theirs in the coming decades can be another source of advantage.However, the as pessimists are not convinced. A larger workforce translates into more workers only if there are productive jobs for it. Will there be enough productive jobs? One way to make progress in answering this question is to understand the commonalities as well as the differences between Indias growth path and that of other populous fast growing Asian economies. By comparing where India is today, with where those countries were at similar stages in their development, as well as by looking at what they did next, we might get a better perspective on what India might need to do. Of course, any such analysis has to be accompanied by two important caveats i. First, countries differ and do not necessarily follow similar trajectories;ii. Second, the global environment has changed.The opportunities India faces now are different from those that previous fast growers faced when they were at a similar stage of development. Thus, blindly replicating their trajectory may be unwise.4

COMPARING GROWTH AND TRADE

If we analyse the various economic outcomes for selected Asian countries around their dates of initial takeoff into periods of high growth, we identify the year of takeoff for comparator Asian countries based on IMF (2006)5 the dates are 1979, 1973, and 1967 for China, Indonesia, and Korea respectively. For India, taking the year of takeoff as 1991, when major economic reforms began, the following narrative is clear as given below : India was growing at similar rates as other Asian economies before takeoff. After takeoff, it kept pace with Indonesia, but China and Korea grew faster. Setting date 0 as the year the countrys per capita GDP in 2000 US dollars, crossed $500; By the time Indias dependency ratio falls below 40 per cent, Chinas growth is more robust under both these alternatives, while Indias matches that of Indonesia. Koreas trajectory is similar to Indias in the initial years after takeoff, though after 10 years the slope of its trajectory increases steeply. By plotting an index of a countrys share of world trade, with year 0 based on our first takeoff definition (1979, 1973, 1967, and 1991 for China, Indonesia, Korea, and India respectively). interestingly, Indias growth in its share of world trade is similar to Chinas and greater than Indonesias at similar periods after takeoff. Indias openness is also evidenced by the trade to GDP ratio, which exceeded 55 per cent in 2011. By contrast, this ratio is only 31 per cent for the United States. The takeaway from the evidence examined so far is that Indias growth performance has been

similar to that of some of the fast-growing Asian economies at similar stages after takeoff, but not as spectacular as Chinas. Interestingly, despite being seen as a trade laggard, India has grown more open to trade at about Chinas pace.

Sources of Growth

For knowing the edge India has in garnering demographic dividend, a comaprision with the other Asian economies in the area of sources of growth will serve the purpose. Growth in per capita income is driven by growth in labour productivity (what the average worker produces), growth in working age population (fewer the people who are in the dependent age group in the population, greater the output), growth in the fraction of those who can work and that actually look for work (labour force participation rate), and growth in those looking for work who actually find it (employment rate). Because accurate employment data are hard to find for developing countries, studies typically ignore the employment rate in decomposing the sources of growth. A decomposition of per capita income growth during the 20 years after takeoff suggests that across countries, much of the increase in per capita income comes from greater labour productivity. Interestingly, except for Korea, LFP* (labour force participation) has fallen on an average annual basis, so it subtracts from growth. Finally, the increase in the share of WAP (working age population) seems to add only a little to growth. Since the increase in working age population is what we call the demographic dividend, the fact that it contributes so little to growth (on average, 0.5 percentage points for India in the 20 years since 1991) may seem a puzzle.The puzzle can be solved this way the increase in the fraction of people working is probably not the main consequence of the demographic dividend. Instead, the effects of the demographic dividend are channelled through the increase in labour productivity, which comes from more physical capital employed per worker (in turn resulting from greater saving and investment), more human capital per worker (which comes from more education as smaller families lead to greater spending on education per child), and greater TFP (total factor productivity).**Therefore, it is useful to see how much each of these factors contributed to labour productivity. Better human capital accounts for only a small part of the growth in labour productivity for Asian fast growers. Instead, the two biggest contributors are the growth in capital deployed per worker and growth in TFP. Indonesia and Korea relied much more on capital deepening. India did not have as much growth in capital per worker as these countries but had stronger growth in TFP. Finally, China grew both because of more capital deployed as well as strong increases in TFP.Quite interestingly, in the years beyond the 20th year after takeoff which India is now entering, capital deepening slowed for both Indonesia and Korea but it increased for China. More interestingly, TFP slipped considerably for Indonesia and was not large for Korea to begin with. However, it increased for China.Precisely speaking, the underpinnings for continued strong Chinese growth in the years beyond the second decade after takeoff are a robust investment rate as well as substantial increases in the intrinsic productivity of jobs. If India were to follow a similar path, it would need to increase savings and investment, both of which will follow from the demographic transformation. But it will also have to increase the intrinsic productivity of jobs, that is TFP.I M F (World Economic Outlook-2006, Asia Rising: Patterns of Economic Development and Growth, Chapter 3) suggests that a significant portion of Chinas increase in TFP has come as workers migrate from low-productivity sectors like agriculture to high-productivity sectors like manufacturing. What lies ahead for India? A recent study6 says that LFP in agriculture is very low but it employs over half the labour force. In contrast, financial and brokerage services are the most productive sector, in the economy, but employ a tiny share of the labour force.

Labour Productivity & its Relocation

IMF (2006) suggests that a significant portion of Chinas increase in TFP has come as workers migrate from low-productivity sectors like agriculture to high-productivity sectors like manufacturing. What lies ahead for India? That so many continue to be dependent on agriculture is one reason that the government has focused on improving productivity in agriculture, even while attempting to support incomes of both farmers and workers through various programmes. Agricultural productivity remains low probably because too many agricultural workers work with relatively fixed and limited amounts of productive assets i.e., land and capital (irrigation, technology, tractors, machinery, and the like). One way to increase labour productivity, therefore, is to increase investment (and thus capital per employee) across all sectors, including agriculture7.An equally effective way of increasing labor productivity might be to increase TFP by moving some of those dependent on low-productivity agriculture to higher-productivity jobs in industry or services. This would also allow those who remain in agriculture to farm larger, more viable plots, employing more mechanised equipment to improve labour productivity. Clearly, more investment in worker- receiving sectors will be needed to keep up the capital per employee, but the typically greater TFP in those sectors will also mean much greater output per capita. Continuing reallocation of workers out of low-productivity sectors into higher-productivity sectors is akin to increasing TFP and can therefore be a growth engine8.What has been the situation of workers reallocation in India? By plotting sectoral shares of employment and shares of value added in the years since takeoff the following situation has been shown by the World Bank (World Development Indicators, July 2012):Situation in Agriculture sector India certainly has a bigger share of employment in agriculture today than the other Asian countries, but perhaps only because it has not had as many years since takeoff. Employment share and value added share in agriculture in India is coming down at a similar pace as in the other Asian economies (though Korea seems to have a lower share of people in agriculture). Extrapolating into the future, if India followed Chinas or Indonesias path, about a 10 percentage point share of overall employment would move out of agriculture in the next 10 years, bringing the share of employment in agriculture down to about 40 per cent.In sector Industry, greater differences are seen

While the growth in Indias share of employment in industry seems to be on par with the growth of other Asian economies at similar stages (with the exception of Korea), the surprising fact is that Indias share of value added in industry has not grown to keep pace with its share of employment,basically, it has fallen. Contrast this picture with Chinas where the share of value added in industry has always been very high relative to its share of employment, or Indonesias and Koreas where the share of value added has kept increasing as the share of employment has increased (e.g. for Indonesia) or even decreased (e.g for Korea). The alarming conclusion is that while workers are being added to industry in India, the productivity of the jobs they are going into has not been high. In part, this is because the data we work with treats low-productivity construction as a part of industry, and the booming construction sector has accounted for a large share of the jobs created in industry. However, an additional problem is that few of the jobs in industry are formal or being created by the comparatively more productive large firms.The Services sector show another typical trait- While the share of employment in services has been growing very slowly, the share of value added is significantly higher than in other Asian economies. China has a similar share of employment in services at a similar time from takeoff even though its share of value added is much lower. A big factor in Indias larger services share is that services started out at the time of take-off with a much larger share, but growth has also been strong.Several finer points suggested by these sectoralpictures across countries : Unlike the conventional wisdom, India does not have more people in agriculture than other Asian countries at similar stages of development and the share of workers dependent on agriculture has been shrinking at a similar pace. However, the pace of shrinkage is set to increase if India is to follow the trajectory of these other countries. One problem is that while industry is creating jobs, these have been relatively low- productivity jobs. As a result, per capita income in India has not benefited as much from inter- sectoral migration of workers out of agriculture as other Asian countries have. A second problem is that the high-productivity services sector is not able to create employment commensurate with its growth in value added.

Chances of Missing Jobs

There is a clear transition of workers out of agriculture if we follow the path of other Asian countries. In addition, the demographic dividend will ensure more workers joining the labour force. How many workers will industry and services have to absorb in the next decade? How many will they absorb if they continue creating jobs as they have in the past? Could the demographic dividend turn into a demographic curse as some have argued? These questions may be answered taking clues from World Banks World Development Indicators-2012 and UN Population Divisions Revision of World Population Prospects-2010:i. Assuming that employment in industry and services will grow during 2010-20 at the same rate as during the previous decade the share of employment in agriculture will fall to 40 per cent by 2020 (the same level as that of China in 2010). Population in the working age group will grow based on projections by the UN Population Division.ii. Assuming the labour force participation rate and the unemployment rate to be unchanged at 2010 levels, 2.8 million jobs will be missing by 2020.iii. To put this in perspective, this will only be 0.5 per cent of the labour force. While any shortfall in jobs is problematic, there does not seem an immediate cause for alarm.There are a large number of assumptions which go into this estimate. For instance, labour force participation is pegged at the 56 per cent rate, the same as in 2010. If instead, more women enter the labour force, reversing the declining trend since 2000, the labour force participation rate could plausibly increase to 58 per cent by 2020. This is lower than the 60 per cent rate in 2000, but even with this conservative assumption, the number of missing jobs increases to 16.7 million, roughly six times that in the baseline scenario, and 3.7 per cent of overall employment in 2010. Finally, if the official unemployment is projected to decrease, say by 2 percentage points, over the next decade, again that would imply the need to employ a larger number of workers. The number of missing jobs in 2020 under this higher expected employment scenario is estimated at 11.8 million or four times that in the baseline scenario.The back-of-the-envelope calculations done above should be taken as just starting point for more careful investigation. While a simple extrapolation of existing trends suggests India can absorb the labour exiting agriculture even if exits increase to the level experienced by China, there is no room for complacency. Minor changes in assumptions lead to tens of millions of additional jobs needed. So even while policymakers focus on making jobs more productive, India also needs more jobs than suggested by current trends so as to have a sufficient buffer.

REASONS BEHIND LESS CREATIVE JOBS

Indias policies have created such a situation that too many small firms stay small and unproductive and are not allowed graceful close down. Too many large profitable firms/businesses prefer relying on temporary contract labour and machines than on training workers for longer-term jobs. We may visit the problem through two routes:i. Impediments to Business Growthii. Labour Regulations

1. IMPEDIMENTS TO BUSINESS GROWTH As a group, it is estimated that micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs)9 employ 81 million people in 36 million units across the country.10 Yet, many of these firms are unable to grow and/or even shut down. As per a recent study11, as compared to surviving small firms in the United States which grow spectacularly, surviving small firms in Mexico grow moderately, while surviving small firms in India shrink. Productivity is commensurately lower in India. Indeed, within the MSME group, there is a strong concentration of small enterprises and near non-existence of medium enterprises. And that is the real challenge of the MSME sectorto be able to not just start up, but also continue to grow, thereby becoming a source of sustainable jobs and value creation.Too many firms in India stay small, unregistered, unincorporated, largely informal, or in the unorganised sector because they can avoid regulations and taxes. These firms have little incentive to invest in upgrading skills of largely temporary workers or in investing in capital equipment that could bring them into the tax net, so their productivity stays low. Low productivity gives them little incentive to grow, completing the vicious circle. These firms face some of the key challenges while starting up and at every level of growth.

Regulatory Environment

The regulatory environment plays an important role in the lifecycle (birth, growth, and death) of MSMEs. We may cite few glaring comparative examples from some sources:2. As per the World Banks Doing Business: Measuring Business Regulations, 2013 India ranks 132 out of 185 countries in ease of doing business, Starting a business where India ranks 173, takes about 12 procedures, 27 days, and a paid up capital of 140 per cent of per capita income. By contrast, it takes only 7 procedures, 19 days, and 18 per cent of per capita income on average for our neighbours in South Asia. After getting done with the initial procedures, entrepreneurs have to obtain a number of clearances when applying for building/occupancy permits and utility connections. These require separate visits to various authorities whose employees often inspect the site. It takes as long as 1.5 months to obtain an electricity connection in 7 out of the 17 benchmarked Indian cities. Many processes especially at state level remain complex, forcing companies to hire a consultant, thereby adding to the costs.3. An easier process of exit is needed for the MSME, which can quicken and simplify the process of resolving the claims of workers and financiers so that the assets of the failed firm can be put to better use. According to World Banks Doing Business in India, 2009 Across 17 Indian cities, the insolvency process takes on average 7.9 years, costs 8.6 per cent of the estate value (mostly due to attorney fees, newspaper publication costs, liquidators fees, and preservation costs), and the recovery rate is only 13.7 per cent. The process is slower even than in other South Asian countries where, in the same year, it took on average five years and creditors could expect to recover on average 19.9 per cent. Low asset recovery in failed firms feeds into lower levels of financing for Indian MSMEs.The government has tried to compensate for some of these impediments by offering MSMEs incentives and concessions. But schemes and interventions based on tightly defined classifications create an incentive structure that might prevent firms from growing. Service tax exemptions for firms with less than Rs 10 lakh revenue and exemption from central excise duty for firms with an annual turnover of less than Rs 1.5 crore are examples of these schemes. The jump from small to medium enterprise especially entails loss of several perks.4. However, there are, also many good practices and regulations strewn over different cities of India, which, if standardised and adopted across the country, can improve the business climate enormously. The World Banks Doing Business in India, 2009 has shown that if a hypothetical city called Indiana were to adopt best practices found in several benchmarked cities (e.g. lowering number of procedures to start business to Patna levels, days to start a business to Mumbai levels, procedures around construction permits to Ahmedabad levels, days to enforce a contract to Guwahati levels, and recovery rate for closing a business to Hyderabad levels), it would rank a much improved 67 out of the 181 economies measured.

Difficult Funding

Indian banks and financial institutio