💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: GS3-02.Inclusive growth and issues therein

  • Ujjwala LPG Scheme: 90-lakh beneficiaries don’t take refills

    In the financial year 2021-22, 90-lakh beneficiaries of the flagship welfare scheme, Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY), did not take refill gas cylinders. And over one crore beneficiaries got their refills only once.

    About the PM Ujjwala Yojana

    • Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY) was launched in 2016, with the aim to provide Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) connections to five crore women members of below poverty line (BPL) households in the first phase.
    • he scheme was expanded in April 2018 to include women beneficiaries from seven more categories (SC/ST, PMAY, AAY, Most backward classes, tea garden, forest dwellers, Islands).
    • In the second phase the target was expanded to eight crore LPG connections.

    Why was this scheme launched?

    • Indoor air pollution is also responsible for a significant number of acute respiratory illnesses in young children.
    • Providing LPG connections to BPL households will ensure universal coverage of cooking gas in the country.
    • This measure has empowered women and protected their health. It reduced drudgery and the time spent on cooking.
    • It will also provide employment for rural youth in the supply chain of cooking gas.

    Ujjwala 2.0

    • Now migrant workers would only be required to submit a self-declaration of their residential address to get the gas connection.
    • Along with a deposit-free LPG connection, Ujjwala 2.0 will provide the first refill and a hotplate free of cost to the beneficiaries.

     

    UPSC 2023 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • The myth of the trickle-down

    Context

    There is fear that the way the money will be used by the Centre will disempower the states further, just when they must do most of the heavy lifting on public welfare.

    Wealth creation and trickle-down

    • Failure of trickle-down: Evidence from around the world is that the economic policy paradigm, of first increasing the overall size of the pie by reducing taxes at the top and then “redistributing” the wealth, has not delivered benefits to people.
    • Gandhiji had declared that he was not against wealth creators. He lauded wealth creation.
    • However, it must not be at the cost of workers and welfare.
    • Wealth creators must be trustees of the wealth they create, not its exclusive owners.

    The demand-side problem of the Indian economy

    • The Indian economy is suffering from a chronic “demand-side” problem that is becoming worse with misguided economic policies.
    • Young people who have been getting educated in larger numbers than before, even learning vocational skills, cannot find jobs.
    •  If people don’t earn, demand will not increase, and investments in businesses will not be attractive.
    • Moreover, frustrated youth are tinderboxes for social unrest.

    Financial globalization and its impact on India

    • Around the world, there is a reaction to the financial globalization of the last 30 years.
    • In his book, Davos Man, Peter Goodman explains how the wealthiest people have influenced economic policies in democratic countries from the 1990s to make themselves wealthier.
    • Thomas Piketty has documented how wealth inequalities have increased alarmingly.
    • Wealth has accumulated at the top, with regressive tax policies along with deregulation.
    • Government expenditure on social reforms has been crimped.

    Way forward

    • The global economy must move on from hyper-financial, deregulated capitalism, which has given easy money too much freedom.
    • They must move out from their ideological ruts.
    • Invest in human capital: Until the economy grows there will be no resources to invest in human development — whereas China invested in human development before its economic take-off.
    • Protection to industrial sector: That an unprepared industrial sector will thrive in global free trade — whereas the UK and US (and Japan and China too), grew their industrial sectors behind walls of protection, and then demanded that the rest open their markets to the might of their enterprises.
    • Inclusive growth: Political divisions by religion and caste are tearing India’s social fabric again. The Indian economy must grow inclusively to repair it.

    Conclusion

    Indian policymakers must urgently discover India’s own, contextually appropriate model of development and shed defunct economic theories.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Highlights of the Inequality Kills Report

    The COVID-19 pandemic has heightened economic inequalities across the world says the Inequality Kills Report.

    Try substantiating this:

     

    Q. Extreme inequality is a form of ‘economic violence’—where structural and systemic policy and political choices are skewed in favor of the richest and the most powerful people. Critically examine.

    What is the “Inequality Kills” Report?

    • “Inequality Kills: The unparalleled action needed to combat unprecedented inequality in the wake of COVID-19” is a report released in January 2022 by Oxfam, a U.K.-based consortium.
    • The report argues for sustained and immediate action to end the pandemic, address global inequality and initiate concerted measures to tackle the climate emergency.
    • The central argument of the report is that inequality is a death sentence for people that are marginalized by social and economic structures and removed from political decision-making.

    Key highlights

    • Billionaire variants: Identifying this process as “the billionaire variant”, the report says that this vertical aggregation of global wealth into the hands of a few is “profoundly dangerous for our world”.
    • Pauperization: 160 million people were rendered poor during the pandemic, while the ten richest people doubled their fortunes since the start of the pandemic.
    • Vaccine apartheid: Holding governments to account the report identifies “vaccine apartheid” (unequal access to vaccines between countries) and the lack of universal vaccination programs in many countries.
    • Inflation: It also demonstrates how emergency government expenditure (estimated at $16 trillion) that was meant to keep economies afloat during this crisis, inflated stock prices.
    • Collective: This resulted in billionaires’ collective wealth increasing by $5 trillion during the pandemic.

    Why does the report say that inequality kills?

    • For the writers of the report inequality is not an abstract theory.
    • Instead, they see it as institutionalized violence against poorer people.
    • Extreme inequality is a form of ‘economic violence’—where structural and systemic policy and political choices that are skewed in favor of the richest and the most powerful people.
    • This results in direct harm to the vast majority of ordinary people worldwide.

    Implications of inequality

    • Crime and violence: The report identifies higher inequality with more crime and violence and less social trust.
    • Impact on marginalized: The brunt of inequality and the violence is borne, for instance, by women across the world, Dalits in India, Black, Native American and Latin persons in the US and indigenous groups in many countries.
    • Victimization of women: Pointing to the example of women, the problem runs a lot deeper as 13 million women have not returned to the workforce and 20 million girls are at risk of losing access to education.

    Way ahead

    The “Inequality Kills” report proposes far-reaching changes to structures of government, economy and policy-making to fight inequality.

    • Vaccine sharing: It urgently asks for “vaccine recipes” to be made open-source so that every qualified vaccine manufacturer can manufacture them.
    • Taxing the opportunists: The report then asks for governments to claw back the wealth from billionaires by administering solidarity taxes higher than 90% especially on the billionaires that have profited during pandemic.
    • Taxation reforms: The report asks for permanent cancellation of tax havens, progressive taxation on corporations and an end to tax dodging by corporations.
    • Welfare: The report then suggests that this regained wealth be redirected towards building income safety nets, universalizing healthcare for everyone, investing in green technologies and democratizing them, and, investing in protecting women from violence.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • A new form of socialism powered by cooperative economic enterprises is required

    Context

    Inequalities of wealth have increased around the world and India is becoming one of the world’s most unequal countries.

    Role of globalisation and privatisation in increasing economic distress

    • Economic despair is feeding the rise of authoritarianism, nationalism, and identity politics.
    • Role of Globalisation: Opening national borders to free trade became an ideology in economics in the last 30 years.
    • Taxes of incomes and wealth at the top were also reduced.
    • The ideological justification was that the animal spirits of ‘wealth creators’ must not be dampened.
    • With higher taxes until the 1970s, the U.S. and many countries in Europe had built up their public health and education infrastructure and strengthened social security systems.
    • The rich are now being taxed much less than they were.
    • The pie has grown larger but the richest few have been eating, and hoarding, most of it themselves.
    • Role of privatisation: ‘Privatisation’ of everything became another ideological imperative in economics by the turn of the century.
    • Selling off public enterprises raises resources for funds-starved governments.
    • Another justification is efficiency in delivery of services, setting aside ethical questions of equity.
    • When ‘public’ is converted to ‘private’, rich people can buy what they need.
    • The gaps between the haves and the have-nots become larger.

    How liberal economic policies are creating illiberal societies

    • Liberal economists, promoting free markets, free trade, and privatisation, are worried by nationalism and authoritarian governments.
    • They rail against “populist” policies of governments that subsidise the poor and adopt industrial strategies for self-reliance and jobs for their citizens.
    • Liberals must re-examine their ideas of economics, to understand their own culpability in creating authoritarian and identitarian politics.

    The failure of capitalism and communism

    • While communism had lifted living standards, and the health and education of masses of poorer people faster than capitalism could, communism’s solution to the “property” question — that there should be no private property — was a failure.
    • It deprived people of personal liberties.
    • Capitalism’s solution to the property problem — replacing all publicly owned enterprises with privately owned ones (and reducing taxes on wealth and high incomes) has not worked either.
    • It has denied many of their basic human needs of health, education and social security, and equal opportunities for their children.
    • The private property solution has also harmed the natural environment.

    Way forward

    • Climate change and political rumblings around the world are both warnings that capitalism needs reform.
    • Economic policies must be based on new ideas.
    • Thought leaders and policymakers in India must lead the world out of the rut of ideas in which it seems to be trapped.
    • Principles of human rights must not be overpowered by property rights.
    • A new form of “Gandhian” democratic socialism, powered by cooperative economic enterprises, is required in the 21st century, to create wealth at the bottom, not only at the top, and save humanity and the planet.

    Conclusion

    A new form of ‘Gandhian’ democratic socialism powered by cooperative economic enterprises is required.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Dravidian Model of Development

    The Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu is pushing for a ‘Dravidian Model’ where economic development is inclusive.

    What is the Dravidian Model?

    • The goal is equal economic development that will be in tune with social justice.
    • It has taken root since the days of the Justice Party government [in pre-Independent India].
    • TN polity has divided the task into short-term and long-term, and travels with the objective of improving the economy by implementing them within the time frame.

    Note: The Government of India Act 1919 implemented the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, instituting a Diarchy in Madras Presidency. The diarchial period extended from 1920 to 1937, encompassing five elections. Justice party was in power for 13 of 17 years.

    Unique features of this developmental approach

    (1) Financial planning

    • TN has constituted an Economic Advisory Council comprising internationally renowned economists since there is a need to evolve an economic development to suit the current situation.
    • It has emerged out higher as comparatively high levels of human development with economic dynamism.

    (2) Health and education

    • It sought and ensured opportunity-equalizing policies in the expanding modern sectors through affirmative action policies and investments in education and health.
    • Tamil Nadu has been a pioneer in broad-basing entry into school education through a slew of incentives, the noon meal scheme being the most well-known.

    (3) Social Harmony

    • It also succeeded in building a bloc of lower caste groups under a Dravidian-Tamil identity that subsumed and sought to transcend individual caste identities.
    • It has distinct political mobilization against caste-based inequalities in the state.
    • Mobilization built an ethos that questioned the privileges of caste elites and the naturalness of merit in a caste society.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Rythu Bandhu: Telangana DBT scheme for farmers’ assistance

    The total funds disbursed under Rythu Bandhu, Telangana government’s direct benefit transfer scheme for farmers, will soon touch Rs 50,000 crore in the coming days.

    What is Rythu Bandhu?

    • Rythu Bandhu is a scheme under which the state government extends financial support to land-owning farmers at the beginning of the crop season through direct benefit transfer.
    • The scheme aims to take care of the initial investment needs and do not fall into a debt trap.
    • This in turn instills confidence in farmers, enhances productivity and income, and breaks the cycle of rural indebtedness.

    DBT under the Scheme

    • Each farmer gets Rs 5,000 per acre per crop season without any ceiling on the number of acres held.
    • So, a farmer who owns two acres of land would receive Rs 20,000 a year, whereas a farmer who owns 10 acres would receive Rs 1 lakh a year from the government.
    • The grant helps them cover the expenses on input requirements such as seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, and labour.

    How much does it cost the state exchequer?

    • Since the Kharif season of 2018, the state government has been crediting Rythu Bandhu assistance to farmers.
    • As of date, it has credited Rs 43,036.64 crore into the bank accounts of beneficiaries.
    • This season, the state government will disburse another Rs 7638.99 crore, taking the total sum disbursed so far to over Rs 50,000 crore.

    Comparing with the PM-KISAN scheme

    • The state government has often said that the Centre’s PM-KISAN (Pradhan Mantri Kisan Samman Nidhi) scheme is a “copy” of Rythu Bandhu.
    • Under PM-KISAN, a land-holding family receives an income support of 6,000 per year in three equal installments.
    • Rythu Bandhu is based on anticipated input expenditure for each acre of land and there is no restriction on the number of acres owned by a farmer.
    • PM-KISAN only provides support to the family and not to the farm units.

    Criticisms of the Rythu Bandhu Scheme

    • The scheme does not cover the landless or tenant farmers.
    • Farmer bodies have been demanding that the state government should extend the agriculture assistance to tenant farmers as well.
    • They have pointed out that those who work on lands taken on lease from landowners also need government assistance at the beginning of a crop season.
    • It is difficult to bring tenant farmers under the ambit of the scheme because of the informal nature of the agreements they enter into.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • What rising inequality means

    Context

    In the aftermath of Covid-19 pandemic, evaluating the state of inequality serves as an eye-opener on the income/wealth divides prevailing across regions.

    Income and wealth inequality in the world

    • The top 10% of the global population share 52% of the total income, while the bottom half survives with a mere 8.5% of it.
    • This leaves the 40% in the middle with 40% of the income.
    • This distribution shows the tendency of a rising middle class with lower disparity in income, but it also shows that the status of the poor is worsening day by day.
    • Inequality of wealth: In terms of wealth, the top 10% of the global population own 76% of the total wealth, while the bottom 50% share a mere 2%.
    • Some additional features of this exposition of inequality also relate to imbalance of women’s share in income as well as the ecological inequities indicated by the differential carbon emission levels.

    Factors responsible for rising inequality

    [1]  Absence of effective measures of redistribution

    • Inequality varies across regions. It is moderate in Europe and sharp in Africa.
    •  The top 10% have an income share of 36% in Europe vis-à-vis the top 10% with a share of 58% of the total income in West Asia and North Africa.
    • Measures for redistribution: This disparity shows that worsening inequalities are avoidable with appropriate measures in place.

    [2] The absence of measures discouraging undue accumulation

    • Kuznet’s curve not follower everywhere: While there is an argument in literature that inequalities are a manifestation of the average level of income, as explained by the Kuznets’ theory, the prevailing pattern across countries does not follow the same.
    • Average income level is poor predictor of inequality: The average income levels seem to be poor predictors of the levels of inequality, with high-income countries such as the U.S. having higher levels of inequality as against countries such as Sweden, which have moderate levels of inequality.
    • Similar contradictions are also seen when we contrast middle-income nations such as Brazil, India and China as against Malaysia and Uruguay.
    • Hence, emerging inequalities are not necessarily an outcome of rising levels of income in the post-liberalisation era, but a depiction of poor redistributive policies towards discouragement of accumulation by governments with due sensitivity towards inequalities.

    How inequality hurts government finances

    • This prevailing pattern of wealth concentration and differential levels of income around the world has also resulted in rich nations having poor governments.
    • Such a situation has two underpinnings: one, governments have a limited capacity to act on inequality aversion measures and two, private interests overshadow the distributional fairness of wealth. 

    Way forward

    • Focus also needs to be placed on reducing disparities in capability domains like education and differential endowments (tangible and intangible) that have the potential to sustain inequalities.

    Consider the question “How rising income and wealth inequality could harm us in various ways? What are the factors responsible for the rising inequality? Suggest the way forward.”

    Conclusion

    The rising levels of income and wealth need to be addresses by policy measures and reducing disparity in capacity domains.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • Co-Lending Model for Banks-NBFCs

    A November 2020 decision by the RBI to permit banks to “co-lend with all registered NBFCs based on a prior agreement” has led to unusual tie-ups between the banks and companies.

     The ‘Co-Lending Model’

    • In September 2018, the RBI had announced “co-origination of loans” by banks and Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) for lending to the priority sector.
    • The arrangement entailed joint contribution of credit at the facility level by both the lenders as also sharing of risks and rewards.
    • Subsequently, based on feedback from stakeholders, the RBI allowed the lenders greater operational flexibility, while requiring them to conform to regulatory guidelines.
    • The primary focus of the revised scheme, rechristened as ‘Co-Lending Model’ (CLM), was to “improve the flow of credit to the unserved and underserved sector of the economy.

    Repercussions of Co-Lending

    (1) Bank-NBFC tie-ups at indiscriminate scale

    • Several banks have entered into co-lending ‘master agreements’ with NBFCs, and more are in the pipeline.
    • SBI, the country’s largest lender, signed a deal with Adani Capital, a small NBFC of a big corporate house, for co-lending to farmers to help them buy tractors and farm implements.

    (2) Greater risk in co-lending

    • NBFCs are required to retain at least a 20 per cent share of individual loans on their books.
    • This means 80 per cent of the risk will be with the banks — who will take the big hit in case of a default.

    (3) Corporates in banking

    • While the RBI hasn’t officially allowed the entry of big corporate houses into the banking space, NBFCs — mostly floated by corporate houses — were already accepting public deposits.
    • They now have more opportunities on the lending side through direct co-lending arrangements.

    Back2Basics: Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC)

    • An NBFC is a company incorporated under the Companies Act 2013 or 1956.
    • According to section 45-I (c) of the RBI Act, a Non–Banking Company carrying on the business of a financial institution will be an NBFC.
    • It further states that the NBFC must be engaged in the business of Loans and Advances, Acquisition of stocks, equities, debt etc issued by the government or any local authority or other marketable securities.

    NBFC business:

    The NBFC business does not include business whose principal business is the following:

    1. Agricultural Activity
    2. Industrial Activity
    3. Purchase or sale of any goods excluding securities
    4. Sale/purchase/construction of any immovable property – Providing of any services

    Difference between Banks and NBFCs:

    • NBFCs lend and make investments and hence their activities are akin to that of banks; however there are a few differences as given below:
    1. NBFC cannot accept demand deposits;
    2. NBFCs do not form part of the payment and settlement system and cannot issue cheques drawn on itself;
    3. Deposit insurance facility of Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation is not available to depositors of NBFCs, unlike in the case of banks.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • World Inequality Report, 2022

    As per the ‘World Inequality Report 2022’, India is among the most unequal countries in the world, with rising poverty and an ‘affluent elite.’

    World Inequality Report

    • This report is published by Mr. Lucas Chancel, the co-director of the World Inequality Lab of the Paris School of Economics.
    • It was coordinated by famed French economist Thomas Piketty.

    Key highlights of the report

    (1) Income divide

    • The report highlights that the top 10% and top 1% in India hold 57% and 22% of the total national income respectively while the bottom 50% share has gone down to 13%.
    • The average national income of the Indian adult population is Rs 2,04,200.
    • The bottom 50% earns 20 times more than the top 10%.

     (2) Decline in public wealth

    • The report notes that the share of public wealth across countries has been on a decline for decades now.
    • Public assets typically include public buildings housing administrations, schools, universities, hospitals, and other public services.

    (3) Inequality during Colonial India

    • Going back in time, the report shows that the income inequality in India under the British colonial rule (1858-1947) was very high, with a top 10% income share around 50%.
    • After independence, due to socialist-inspired five-year plans, this share was reduced to 35-40%.
    • Owing to poor post-Independence economic conditions, India embarked upon deregulation and loosening controls in the form of liberalization policies.

    (4) Wealth inequality

    • The average household wealth in India is around Rs 9,83,010.
    • The bottom 50% of the nation can be seen to own almost nothing, with an average wealth of Rs 66,280 or 6% of the total pie.
    • The middle class is relatively poor with an average wealth of Rs 7,23,930 or 29.5% of the total.
    • The top 10% owns 65% of the total wealth, averaging Rs 63,54,070 and the top 1% owns 33%, averaging Rs 3,24,49,360.

    (5) Gender Inequality

    • Gender inequality in India is also considered on the higher end of the spectrum.
    • The share of female labor income share in India is equal to 18% which is significantly lower than the average in Asia (21%, excluding China) & is among the lowest in the world.
    • Although, the number is slightly higher than the average share in the Middle East (15%).
    • However, a significant increase has been observed since 1990 (+8 p.p.) but it has been insufficient to lift women’s labor income share to the regional average.

    (6) Poor States, wealthy population

    • Countries across the world have become richer over the past 40 years, but their governments have become significantly poorer.
    • The report shows that the share of wealth held by public actors is close to zero or negative in rich countries, meaning that the totality of wealth is in private hands.
    • Following the pandemic, governments borrowed the equivalent of 10-20% of GDP, essentially from the private sector.

    (7) Issue over data availability

    • The report goes on to say that over the past three years, the quality of inequality data released by the government has seriously deteriorated.
    • This has made it particularly difficult to assess recent inequality changes.

    Conclusions from the report

    (1) Wealth is mostly inherited and has a snowball effect

    • People accumulate wealth across generations through inheritance.
    • It has a snowball effect, wherein successive generations will gain more, but in their concentrated section.
    • More capital incentivizes banks to lend. This is why the rich section’s wealth grows faster.

    (2) Wealth management is necessary

    • Public wealth has been declining for two reasons:
    1. First, governments have been privatizing assets and natural resources at low costs.
    2. Second, governments contract debt to the private sector, making it richer.
    • Without assets, governments have low resources to invest and to mitigate climate change impacts, particularly in the energy sector.
    • Currently, governments have more debts than assets. This calls for strategic management of the economy.

     

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)

  • A white touch to a refreshed green revolution

    Context

    November 26, 2021 was celebrated in Anand, Gujarat as the 100th birth anniversary of Verghese Kurien, the leader of India’s ‘white revolution’.

    Analysing the Green revolution

    • Purpose of green revolution: The purpose of the green revolution was to increase the output of agriculture to prevent shortages of food.
    • Technocratic enterprise: The green revolution was largely a technocratic enterprise driven by science and the principles of efficiency.
    • It required inputs, like chemical fertilizers, to be produced on scale and at low cost.
    • Therefore, large fertilizer factories were set up for the green revolution. And large dams and irrigation systems were also required to feed water on a large scale.
    • Monocropping on fields was necessary to apply all appropriate inputs — seeds, fertilizer, water, etc., on scale.
    •  Monocropping increased the efficiency in application of inputs.
    • Thus, farms became like large, dedicated engineering factories designed to produce large volumes efficiently.
    •  Diversity in the products and processes of large factories creates complexity.
    • Therefore, diversity is weeded out to keep the factories well-focused on the outputs they are designed for.

    The contrast between White and Green revolution

    • The contrast between the two revolutions provides valuable insights. Their purposes were different.
    • Purpose of white revolution: The purpose of the white revolution was to increase the incomes of small farmers in Gujarat, not the output of milk.
    • The white revolution was a socio-economic enterprise driven by political leaders and principles of equity.

    Understanding the success of Amul

    • Amul has become one of India’s most loved brands, and is respected internationally too for the quality of its products and the efficiency of its management.
    • The fledgling, farmer-owned, Indian enterprise had many technological problems to solve.
    • That is why they enrolled Kurien, who had studied engineering in the United States.
    • Indigenous solutions: Kurien and his engineering compatriots in the organisation were compelled to develop solutions indigenously when Indian policy makers, influenced by foreign experts, said Indians could not make it.
    • The enterprise achieved its outcome of empowering farmers because the governance of the enterprise to achieve equity was always kept in the foreground, with the efficiency of its production processes in the background as a means to the outcome.

    Increasing productivity and issues with it

    • ‘Productivity’, when defined as output per worker, can be increased by eliminating workers.
    • This may be an acceptable way to measure and increase productivity when the purpose of the enterprise is to increase profits of investors in the enterprise.
    • It is a wrong approach to productivity when the purpose of the enterprise is to enable more workers to increase their incomes, which must be the aim of any policy to increase small farmers’ incomes.
    • The need for new solutions to increase farmers’ incomes has become imperative.
    • Moreover, fundamental changes in economics and management sciences are necessary to reverse the degradation of the planet’s natural environment that has taken place with the application of modern technological solutions and management methods for the pursuit of economic growth.

    Suggestions to increase inclusion and improve environmental sustainability

    • Ensure inclusion and equity: Increase in the incomes and wealth of the workers and small asset owners in the enterprise must be the purpose of the enterprise, rather than production of better returns for investors.
    • Social side: The ‘social’ side of the enterprise is as important as its ‘business’ side.
    • Therefore, new metrics of performance must be used, and many ‘non-corporate’ methods of management learned and applied to strengthen its social fabric.
    • Local solution: Solutions must be ‘local systems’ solutions, rather than ‘global (or national) scale’ solutions.
    • The resources in the local environment (including local workers) must be the principal resources of the enterprise.
    • Practical use of science: Science must be practical and useable by the people on the ground rather than a science developed by experts to convince other experts.
    • Moreover, people on the ground are often better scientists from whom scientists in universities can learn useful science.
    • Sustainable solution through evolution: Sustainable transformations are brought about by a steady process of evolution, not by drastic revolution.
    • Large-scale transformations imposed from the top can have strong side-effects.

    Consider the question “Contrast the differences between the White Revolution and Green Revolution in India. What lessons can be applied to Indian agriculture from the success of the White Revolution in India?”

    Conclusion

    The essence of democratic economic governance is that an enterprise must be of the people, for the people, and governed by the people too.

    UPSC 2022 countdown has begun! Get your personal guidance plan now! (Click here)