Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Political Geography India Content Type Working Paper Author Arvind Subramanian

1. India's Growth in the 2000s: Four Facts

Author:
Arvind Subramanian and Utsav Kumar
Publication Date:
11-2011
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
This paper marks the first attempt at examining the growth performance across Indian states for the 2000s, a period also marked by the global financial crisis. Four key findings are reported. First, consistent with the fact that the 2000s was the best ever decade for Indian macroeconomic performance, growth increased across almost all major states in 2001–09 compared to 1993–2001. Second, nevertheless, there is a continued phenomenon of divergence or rising inequality across states: On average the richer states in 2001 grew faster in 2001–09. Third, during the crisis years of 2008 and 2009, states with the highest growth in 2001–07 suffered the largest deceleration. Since states with the highest growth were also the most open, it seems that openness creates dynamism and vulnerability. Finally, although the demographic dividend—a young population boosting economic dynamism—was evident before 2000, there is little evidence that there was any dividend in the 2000s. Demography alone cannot be counted on for future economic growth.
Topic:
Demographics, Development, Economics, Industrial Policy, International Trade and Finance, and Social Stratification
Political Geography:
South Asia and India

2. Criss-Crossing Globalization: Uphill Flows of Skill-Intensive Goods and Foreign Direct Investment

Author:
Arvind Subramanian and Aaditya Mattoo
Publication Date:
08-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This paper documents an unusual and possibly significant phenomenon: the export of skills, embodied in goods, services or capital from poorer to richer countries. We first present a set of stylized facts. Using a measure which combines the sophistication of a country's exports with the average income level of destination countries, we show that the performance of a number of developing countries, notably China, Mexico and South Africa, matches that of much more advanced countries, such as Japan, Spain and USA. Creating a new combined dataset on FDI (covering greenfield investment as well as mergers and acquisitions) we show that flows of FDI to OECD countries from developing countries like Brazil, India, Malaysia and South Africa as a share of their GDP, are as large as flows from countries like Japan, Korea and the US. Then, taking the work of Hausmann et al (2007) as a point of departure, we suggest that it is not just the composition of exports but their destination that matters. In both cross-sectional and panel regressions, with a range of controls, we find that a measure of uphill flows of sophisticated goods is significantly associated with better growth performance. These results suggest the need for a deeper analysis of whether development benefits might derive not from deifying comparative advantage but from defying it.
Topic:
Development, Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Foreign Direct Investment
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, Malaysia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Spain, and Korea

3. Can Global De-Carbonization Inhibit Developing-Country Industrialization?

Author:
Arvind Subramanian, Aaditya Mattoo, Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, and Jianwu He
Publication Date:
11-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Most economic analyses of climate change have focused on the aggregate impact on countries of mitigation actions. We depart first in disaggregating the impact by sector, focusing particularly on manufacturing output and exports because of the potential growth consequences. Second, we decompose the impact of an agreement on emissions reductions into three components: the change in the price of carbon due to each country's emission cuts per se; the further change in this price due to emissions tradability; and the changes due to any international transfers (private and public). Manufacturing output and exports in low carbon intensity countries such as Brazil are not adversely affected. In contrast, in high carbon intensity countries, such as China and India, even a modest agreement depresses manufacturing output by 6-7 percent and manufacturing exports by 9-11 percent. The increase in the carbon price induced by emissions tradability hurts manufacturing output most while the Dutch disease effects of transfers hurt exports most. If the growth costs of these structural changes are judged to be substantial, the current policy consensus, which favors emissions tradability (on efficiency grounds) supplemented with financial transfers (on equity grounds), needs re-consideration.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, and Economics
Political Geography:
China, India, and Brazil