đŸ’„Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Economics

  • New Umbrella Entity (NUE) for Retail Payment Systems

    The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has proposed to set up a new pan-India new umbrella entity (NUE) or entities focussing on retail payment systems with a minimum paid-up capital of Rs 500 crore.

    New Umbrella Entity (NUE)

    • The proposed entity will set up, manage and operate new payment systems especially in the retail space.
    • It would comprise of but not limited to ATMs, white label PoS, Aadhaar-based payments and remittance services, develop payment methods, standards and technologies, monitor related issues and internationally.
    • It would take care of developmental objectives like enhancement of awareness about the payment systems.
    • The RBI retains the right to approve the appointment of directors as also to nominate a member on the board of the NUE.
    • The NUE should conform to the norms of corporate governance along with ‘fit and proper’ criteria for persons to be appointed on its board.

    Functions

    It will:

    • operate clearing and settlement systems
    • identify and manage relevant risks such as settlement, credit, liquidity and operational and preserve the integrity of the system
    • monitor retail payment system developments and related issues in the country and internationally to avoid shocks, frauds and contagions that may adversely affect the system and the economy in general

    Terms of reference

    • The entity eligible to apply as promoter or the promoter group for the NUE should be ‘owned and controlled by residents’ with 3 years’ experience in the payments ecosystem as Payment System Operator (PSO) or Payment Service Provider (PSP) or Technology Service Provider (TSP).
    • The shareholding pattern should be diversified.
    • Any entity holding more than 25 per cent of the paid-up capital of the NUE will be deemed to be a promoter.

  • A new approach on investment

    Context

    When Prime Minister Narendra Modi welcomes U.S. President Donald Trump to India this month the two leaders are expected to sign a first-ever trade agreement.

    What will be on the agenda of the trade deal?

    • GSP issues: The restoration of India’s Generalised System of Preferences benefits,
    • Pricing of medical devices.
    • And agriculture trade are all important.
    • Incremental outcomes: If the two sides continue efforts to achieve incremental outcomes, the start of negotiations on a comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) could even be a credible scenario. Presently, this is not the case.

    What could be the incremental outcomes?

    • The most obvious candidates are-
      • Intellectual property rights (IPR).
      • IPR has historically been an area of contention between the two, but discussions on IPR have progressed well in recent years.
      • Digital trade.
      • Both are grappling with the appropriate scope and approach for regulating electronic commerce issues in this digital age.
      • Ideally, there should be room to seriously consider better ways to encourage skilled professionals to work in the other’s economy.
    • Progress on the investment

    There are already some shared interests in the area of investment.

    • For example, India invests in the U.S. and continues to seek U.S. investment in India.
    • FDI issue: Foreign direct investment (FDI), this is an important moment to do more to encourage it than simply welcoming it.
    • Need to negotiate o investment: Ideally, the two sides should move ahead to negotiate an agreement on investment matters that can provide greater transparency, predictability, and regulatory certainty to investors from the other country.
    • Negotiation on FDI off the table: It appears that the traditional approach through which countries pursue commitments on FDI, bilateral investment treaties, or ‘BITs’ (bilateral investment treaties) is off the table.
    • The Trump administration has put a hold on negotiating additional BITs and appears to be suspicious of how well they balance U.S. interests.
    • The Indian government is similarly sceptical of BITs, having cancelled all existing ones soon after it came into office.

    Need for the new approach on the investment issues

    • Until they resume their work on BITs, the two sides may find common ground in devising a new approach to investment issue.
    • What the new approach involve?
    • Taking cues from their respective FTAs: A starting point should be to review what they have done in their recent FTAs.
    • Abandonment of investor-state dispute settlement: The recently concluded U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement contains a novel approach on investment notably its abandonment of investor-state dispute settlement with respect to the U.S. and Canada.
      • Similarly, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, which India had been negotiating with ASEAN, Australia, China, Japan, Korea, and New Zealand, does not include investor-state dispute settlement.
      • While India chose not to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership when it was concluded at the end of last year, it appears to have been on board with the FTA’s investment provisions.
    • Where the agreement focus as of now? For now, however, both countries should focus on what is doable. A U.S.-India investment agreement could focus on-
      • Fair treatment for investors from the other country.
      • Regulatory transparency and predictability.
      • And approaches for resolving concerns short of investor-state dispute settlements.
    • At a later stage: At a later stage-
      • Most likely when the two are prepared to negotiate a more comprehensive bilateral FTA, they can go further on investment matters.

    Conclusion

    A new, hybrid approach on investment would be a substantial step in the right direction. It will be critical to sustaining momentum coming out of a first trade deal when the two leaders meet in Delhi. If India and the U.S. fail this test, the trade relationship is more likely to languish than blossom.

     

  • Shun fiscal adventurism

    Context

    In the run-up to the budget, there was enormous pressure on the finance minister to launch a fiscal stimulus so as to pump-prime the economy. That she did not succumb to the temptation is a big relief.

    Why fiscal stimulus is unwarranted?

    • There is already considerable stimulus in the system. 
    • Excessive fiscal deficit: To her credit, the finance minister took a step towards transparency by admitting to off-balance-sheet borrowings of 0.8 per cent of GDP for both the current and next fiscal year.
      • Acknowledging that the fiscal deficit would actually be higher at 4.6 per cent and 4.3 per cent of GDP respectively. This is already excessive.
    • Unrealistic projection of revenue growth: Add to this the unrealistic projections of revenue growth and disinvestment proceeds for next year and we have a potentially unsustainable fiscal situation.
      • Any stimulus on top of this would have been clearly

    Possibility of undermining the RBI’s efforts

    Fiscal pressure could harm the RBI’s efforts to revive the economy in the following ways-

    • Harming long term investment rates: Fiscal pressures will undermine the Reserve Bank of India’s struggle to revive investment by bringing down long-term interest rates.
    • Rating downgrades: It could result in a sovereign rating downgrade and jeopardise efforts to attract foreign capital.
    • Increase in inflationary pressure: It can stoke inflationary pressures, something we cannot afford when inflation is above the RBI’s target rate.
    • Pressure on the external sector: And most importantly, it can lead to pressures on the external sector.
    • Past experiences: The balance of payments crisis of 1991 and the near crisis of 2013 in the wake of taper tantrums were, at their heart, a consequence of extended fiscal profligacy.

    Counter-arguments of the supporters of the stimulus and fallacies in it

    • Low Debt-to-GDP ratio: It is argued that our debt-to-GDP ratio is low in international terms.
      • Misleading comparison: The data don’t bear this out. In any case, our experience, as well as research, shows that international comparisons of debt-to-GDP ratios, without reference to other parameters, are misleading.
    • Debt in domestic currency: It is also argued that we do not need to worry because our debt is mostly in domestic currency unlike that of many emerging economies.
      • The fallacy in this argument: Our debt in the domestic market didn’t protect us from previous crises, and there is no reason to believe that it will protect us from the next one, especially as our foreign debt is proportionally higher than before.
    • Robust foreign exchange reserves: It is argued that our foreign exchange reserves are robust and a balance of payments crisis is improbable. Such complacency is misplaced.
      • Fallacy- No forex is large enough in bad times: We should not forget the lesson that in good times any amount of forex reserves looks like it is too large, but in bad times no amount of reserves is large enough.

    Quality of fiscal consolidation

    • Quality a cause for concern: As much as the headline fiscal deficit numbers are a cause for concern, the underlying quality of fiscal consolidation is a bigger concern.
    • Increasing revenue deficit: Conveniently off the radar, the revenue deficit, far from coming down, is actually going up.
      • Two-third borrowing to finance revenue expenditure: This year, more than two-thirds of what the government is borrowing is going to finance current expenditures like salaries, pensions, interest payments and subsidies.
      • That ratio will rise to three-quarters next year.
      • Crowding out of the expenditure: This debt-financed revenue expenditure is simply unsustainable as it will increasingly crowd out capital expenditure.
    • Red flags on the state finances.
      • Another dimension of the quality of fiscal consolidation is the combined fiscal position of states which is, in fact, the big elephant in the room.
      • Together, states spend one-and-a-half times more than the Centre.
      • Larger development impact than Centre: Studies show that how efficiently states spend their money has a much greater development impact as compared to the Centre.
      • Red flags by the RBI on states finances: The states are not doing a good job. In its latest annual report on state finances, the RBI raised several red flags on state finances-
      • states’ increasing weakness in their own revenue generation.
      • Their unsustainable debt burdens.
      • And their tendency to retrench capital expenditures in order to accommodate fiscal shocks such as farm loan waivers, power sector loans under UDAY and a host of income transfer schemes.
      • Consequences in the market: The market will penalise mismanagement of public finances; it does not care who is responsible — the Centre or states — for an unsustainable fiscal stance.

    Conclusion

    • The fear of one-off fiscal stimulus becoming permanent: By far the biggest fear about a fiscal stimulus is that it is tempting to plunge into a spending programme saying it is a one-off and will be withdrawn when the pressure eases. Experience shows that it is very difficult to bail out. It is good that the finance minster avoided doing any such thing.
      • As Milton Friedman famously said, there is nothing more permanent than a temporary government programme.
    • Need to kick-start the private investment: What the economy needs for a sustained turnaround is kick-starting private investment.
      • Implementation of reforms: A necessary condition for inspiring investor confidence is the implementation of structural and governance reforms. This will be a long-haul.
      • That the budget did not launch the journey is a big disappointment. But, at least, the budget did not make a bad situation worse by embarking on fiscal adventurism.
      • It’s better, as Keynes said, to be roughly right than precisely wrong.

     

     

  • Protected Special Agriculture Zone

    The Cauvery delta region in Tamil Nadu will be declared as ‘Protected Special Agricultural Zone’ (PSAZ) by the TN govt.

    Cauvery delta PSAZ

    • Declaring PSAZ ensures that particular region will not be granted permission for any new projects like those related to hydrocarbons.
    • Only Agro based Industries would be given permission to be built.
    • The special protection will be bestowed on Cauvery Delta districts such as Thanjavur, Tiruvarur, Nagappattinam, Pudukottai, Cuddalore, Ariyalur, Karur and Tiruchirappalli districts.

    Significance of the move

    • The Cauvery Delta Region is Tamil Nadu’s rice bowl comprising above eight districts.
    • It is just and reasonable that projects like hydrocarbon exploration have raised concerns among farmers and other agriculture-based labourers.
    • Drilling for extraction of oil and gas in these regions that hampers agriculture and posing much environmental impact or health hazards will be stopped immediately.

  • [pib] Godavari and Cauvery River Linking Project

     

    The draft Detailed Project Report (DPR) of the Godavari and Cauvery River Linking Project has been completed by National Water Development Agency (NWDA).

    Godavari– Cauvery Link Project

    • The project consists of 3 links viz., Godavari (Inchampalli/Janampet) – Krishna (Nagarjunasagar), Krishna (Nagarjunasagar) – Pennar (Somasila) and Pennar (Somasila) – Cauvery (Grand Anicut).
    • This proposal to link Godavari, which is prone to flooding, and Krishna, which doesn’t have enough water, has been around for several decades.
    • While river-interlinking for the purposes of navigation as an idea was mooted by the British in India, in 1972, engineer and Union Minister KL Rao proposed the linking of Godavari and Krishna for irrigation.
    • The decades-old proposal finally took shape in the 2000s, and in 2016, the Andhra government linked the two rivers with the Pattiseema-Polavaram Lift Irrigation project, in Andhra’s West Godavari district.

  • India’s rerun of its protectionist folly mars the liberalization era

    Context

    The latest budget’s import tariff hikes signal that a three-decade commitment to trade openness has been all but abandoned.

    Detrimental effects of protectionism

    • In brief, both economic theory and a vast weight of evidence point to the detrimental effects of protectionism. These are-
      • Fostering inefficiency: Far from jump-starting the domestic industry, tariffs, quotas and other trade restrictions foster inefficiency among domestic firms that survive only because of
      • And do not become more productive under it, as the government’s threat to withdraw the protection is never credible.
      • The consumer is the ultimate loser: Meanwhile, upstream industries suffer higher than necessary input costs.
      • Consumers of final goods end up footing the bill.
      • Governments earn some tariff revenue, but never enough to warrant the distortion costs to the economy.
    • Tariff inversion: The tariff “spikes” cause greater distortion than a revenue-equivalent uniform tariff, and may lead to the problem of tariff “inversion”.
      • What is tariff inversion? A situation in which intermediate goods are taxed more heavily than final goods, thus paradoxically further disadvantaging, rather than aiding, domestic producers of final goods.
    • Rent-seeking by domestic industries: Tariffs worsens rent-seeking by domestic industries-
      • Protectionism increases lobbying: A force which would be muted in a world where tariffs are locked at a uniform level by statute, and, as a result, industries individually have less of an incentive to lobby for tariffs that are to be applied economy-wide rather than only for their own benefit.
      • Economists Arvind Panagariya and Dani Rodrik had formalized this intuition many years ago, and it matches both common sense and observation.
      • The apparently random list of sectors that would benefit from tariff increases in the recent budget-strongly suggests the possibility of rent-seeking behaviour.

    Conclusion

    Ample experience of import substitution in economies across the emerging world and over many decades, including in India until 1991, attest to the fact that protectionism, especially abetted by rent-seeking behaviour, is like a rabbit-hole: once inside, one keeps going deeper and deeper, and egress is difficult at best.

  • New rice variety: Muktoshri (IET 21845)

    Researchers have developed and commercialized a rice variety that is resistant to arsenic.

    Muktoshri

    • The new rice variety, Muktoshri — also called IET 21845 —, was developed jointly by the Rice Research Station at Chinsurah coming under West Bengal’s Agriculture Department and the National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow.
    • A gazette notification for the commercial use of Muktoshri was made by West Bengal last year.
    • During our multilocational trials, it was found that this variety uptakes very less amount of arsenic from soil and water in comparison to other varieties of rice.
    • The rice is long and thin, and aromatic. Across the State, thousands of farmers have started cultivation, even in areas where arsenic in groundwater is not an issue, because of the aroma and the yield.

    Significance

    • West Bengal is among the States with the highest concentration of arsenic in groundwater, with as many as 83 blocks across seven districts having higher arsenic levels than permissible limits.
    • Several studies have shown that arsenic from groundwater and the soil can enter the food chain through paddy.
    • According to the WHO, long-term exposure to arsenic, mainly through drinking water and food, can lead to poisoning. Skin lesions and skin cancer are the most characteristic effects.

  • Agartala-Akhaura Railway Link

     

    The landmark Agartala-Akhaura railway line to connect the northeastern region with Bangladesh is expected to be ready by the end of 2021.

    About Agartala-Akhaura Link

    • MoU for Indo-Bangla Railway connectivity project viz. Agartala-Akhaura new Broad Gauge line (15.06 Km) was signed on 16.02.2013 between India and Bangladesh.
    • The link will connect Gangasagar in Bangladesh to Nischintapur in India and from there to Agartala.
    • The Project was at standstill because of the sharp increase in the cost of land for the sections in India.
    • The Railway Ministry would bear the cost of laying the 5.46-km track on the Indian side and the cost of the 10.6-km track on the Bangladesh side was being borne by the Ministry of External Affairs.

  • The high cost of raising trade walls

    Context

    India’s international trade posture appeared to turn protectionist in the past week, with two indicators the government sent out.

    What were the two indicators?

    • The first-Signal sent out in the Budget: The first indicator, which played out live on television was contained in the Union Budget.
      • Laying out the Budget for the year, the finance minister made several references to the problems with free trade and preferential trade agreements (FTAs and PTAs).
      • Raise in tariffs, changes in the act: The Budget raised tariffs on the import of more than 50 items and changed the Customs Act provisions substantially to penalise imports suspected to originate from third countries.
    • The second- India declined negotiations: The other indicator was that India declined to attend a meeting of trade negotiators in Bali that was discussing the next step in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) trade agreement.

    Issues with the Free Trade Agreement

    • What the FM told Parliament: It has been observed that imports under Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) are on the rise.
      • Undue claims of FTA benefits have posed a threat to the domestic industry.
      • Such imports require stringent checks, adding that the government will ensure that all FTAs are aligned to the conscious direction of our policy.
    • What could be the consequences of the Govt. policy?
      • Discouragement to imports: While the Govt. motive may be to protect Indian markets from dumping-primarily by Chinese goods-
      • The consequence of the changes will be to put Indian importers on notice and discourage imports in general.
      • Even as the government reserves the right to modify or cancel preferential tariffs and ban the import or export of any goods that it deems fit.

    The rise in the trade deficit and decision to walk out of FTA

    • The trade deficit with FTA partners: The government’s problem with FTAs was a key theme in its decision to walk out of the RCEP negotiations (of 16 countries) the rise in trade deficits with FTA partners.
    • Review of all agreements: The government says it will now review all those agreements and wants to “correct asymmetry” in negotiations with new partners. The agreement that would be reviewed includes-
      • TAs signed with the 10-nation ASEAN grouping (FTA).
      • Japan (Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, or CEPA).
      • And South Korea (CEPA).

    Why it would not be easy to negotiate bilateral treaties

    • The bilateral agreement would not be a priority for other countries: If India makes a complete break with RCEP, negotiating the bilateral trade agreements (TAs) will not be a priority for the other countries until RCEP is done.
      • The process of legal scrubbing is likely to take most of the year, and any talks with India will probably only follow that.
      • Difficulty in getting better deal: It is also hard to see any of them being able to offer India a better deal bilaterally once they are bound into the multilateral RCEP agreement.

    India’s pending talks on bilateral treaties

    • Negotiations of CECA with Australia: The case of the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) being negotiated with Australia, will be a difficult task, not the least due to its history.
      • India and Australia began CECA talks in 2011.
      • However, talks hit a dead-end in September 2015. With the focus on RCEP, no progress has been made since then.
    • Negotiations of FTA with the UK: A similar scenario awaits the announcement of the India-United Kingdom FTA talks.
      • It is unlikely that the U.K. will actually be able to talk until next year after terms for the K.’s full withdrawal from the European Union (EU) are completed.
    • Negotiation of BTIA with the EU: Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) negotiation are also unlikely to make headway until the UK’s complete withdrawal from the EU.
      • Both sides will have to decide how to revive from where they left off in 2013.
      • Why the negotiations are pending? Making the negotiations harder is the government’s decision to scrap all bilateral investment treaties with 57 countries including EU nations, and bringing in a new Bilateral Investment treaty (BIT) model in 2015.
      • Only Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and most recently Brazil have agreed to sign a new investment treaty based on that model.
    • The US-India trade issue: Finally, there is the much-anticipated resolution of U.S.-India trade issues ahead of the visit of U.S. President.
      • The talks in that visit could also include talks on an FTA.
      • At present, there have only been some non-paper talks on the issue.
      • And given that the U.S. has expressed deep misgivings about India’s BIT model, these talks will also take several years to come to fruition.

    Why India should rethink its stand on FTA

    • First-Prospect of no dispute settlement mechanism: The decline of multilateralism, accelerated by the retrenchment of the U.S. and China’s intransigence have all meant the World Trade Organization (WTO) has lost steam as a world arbiter.
      • This leaves states that are not part of arrangements without a safety net on dispute settlement mechanisms.
    • The second-trade deficit of other countries with India: The government has invoked the massive $57-billion trade deficit with China to explain protectionist measures, but it forgets its own trade surpluses with smaller economies.
      • Particularly in the neighbourhood, where Indian exports form more than 80% of total trade with Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Sri Lanka, respectively.
    • Third- The rise of regional agreements: It is clear that most of the world is now divided into regional FTAs, for example-
      • The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) for North America.
      • The Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR for its Spanish initials) for South America.
      • The EU, the Eurasian Economic Union (Russia and neighbours).
      • The African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA).
      • The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) FTA in West Asia.
      • And now the biggest of them all, RCEP, which minus India, represents a third of the world’s population and just under a third of its GDP.
    • Fourth- Finally, the trend across the world does not favour trade in services the way it does in goods.
      • India’s strength in the services sector and its demand for more mobility for Indian employees, is thus becoming another sticky point in FTA negotiations.

    Conclusion

    India’s demographic might is certainly attractive for international investors, but only if that vast market has purchasing power and is not riven by social unrest and instability. India’s demographic might is certainly attractive for international investors, but only if that vast market has purchasing power and is not riven by social unrest and instability.

     

  • RBI’s growth push

    Context

    February signalled a new dynamic-Monetary policy is no longer driven by MPC.

    What changed after December MPC review

    • Pause in the rate cut by MPC: In its December policy, the Reserve Bank of India suddenly paused on cutting rates, putting the ball in the government’s court to support growth.
    • Conservative union budget: With last week’s Union Budget belying expectations of short-term growth boosters, the ball was back in the RBI’s court.
      • The Budget opted for fiscal conservativism over activism, consolidating the fiscal deficit to 3.5 per cent of GDP in 2020-21 from 3.8 per cent in 2019-20– bypassing any ambitious expenditure boost or significant tax cuts.
    • Rise in the inflation in Dec-Feb interval: Meanwhile, the policy arithmetic turned more complicated for the MPC.
      • At the time of the December policy meeting, CPI inflation was trending close to 5 per cent (the October reading was 4.6 per cent).
      • Since then a combination of supply-side shocks, which led for example to unseasonally high vegetable and protein prices, buoyed inflation to over 7 per cent, nearly 140 basis points above the RBI’s upper bound comfort zone of 6 per cent.
      • As a primarily inflation-targeting central bank, this effectively stopped the MPC from easing further. 

    Key takeaways from February MPC meeting

    • The February policy meeting removed two key uncertainties in the current policy scenario.
    • First, the RBI is still very concerned about growth and the burgeoning negative gap between the current growth trajectory and potential growth.
    • Second, monetary policy is no longer strictly limited to the MPC’s decision-making.
      • Because of the risk of supply-side shocks hitting inflation, it is understandable that the RBI has summarised its outlook on inflation as “highly uncertain”.
      • Hence, of the policy measures that the RBI has at its disposal, the MPC’s “conventional” arrow of rate cuts was left unused.
      • Instead, the RBI has opted for macroprudential intervention, unveiling two other “unconventional” policy arrows.

    RBI opting for macroprudential intervention in two ways

    • Policy transmission via LTRO-the first arrow: The primary macro challenge has been transmission via the credit channel — banks are not lowering their deposit rates.
      • Why? This is due to competition from the small savings rate and to protect saver, and in turn are keeping lending rates high.
      • How it impacts economy: Sectors considered higher risk (real estate, MSMEs) find themselves credit-starved.
      • In a move that seems inspired by the European Central Bank’s quantitative easing in 2011, the RBI’s announcement on long term repo operations (LTROs) has been aimed at promising banks longer-duration liquidity at the repo rate, which is cheaper relative to their current deposit rates.
      • The aim is to nudge them to kick-start the credit cycle.
      • The exemption of cash reserve ratio for incremental loans to MSMEs and the retail sector is also aimed at lowering costs for banks, which ideally should be passed onto these sectors.
    • Managing the stress in financial system-the second arrow: It is aimed at managing the looming stress in the financial system from bad loans, especially as deleveraging becomes more difficult during an economic slowdown.
      • Extension to restructuring durations: The extension of the restructuring scheme on MSME loans and projects in the commercial real estate sector is aimed at releasing capital for banks in the short term.
      • Though banks will ultimately need to recognise loans that are non-performing.
      • Easing guidelines on the classification of loans: Similarly, easing guidelines on the classification of loans for projects in the commercial real estate sector that have been delayed is essentially designed to provide some breathing space to banks.

    What does this mean for the macro outlook?

    • Recovery in demand is a must: The RBI’s new macroprudential measures, its “unconventional” policy arrows, while well-meaning, are ultimately supply-side measures.
      • For the RBI to attain its goals, be it on asset quality or transmission, there eventually needs to be a recovery in demand conditions.
      • ECB’s LTRO experience: To be fair, even the ECB’s LTRO programme has had mixed success — a central bank can flood the market with liquidity, but the ultimate onus on releasing it to the real economy rests with banks.
      • So far, excess liquidity has not benefitted segments considered high risk (real estate developers, MSMEs).

    Conclusion

    The ECB introduced the LTRO programme when growth was weak and the euro area was struggling with a severe sovereign debt crisis. With the RBI embarking on something similar, albeit on a smaller scale, the niggling concern is if there is more financial instability lurking around the corner but not yet evident in the current data.