Showing posts with label GDP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GDP. Show all posts

Friday, 8 January 2021

India’s 2020-21 GDP seen contracting 7.7%: Govt’s first advance estimate - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

India’s 2020-21 GDP seen contracting 7.7%: Govt’s first advance estimate.

As per the first advanced estimates of the national income released by the National Statistical Office (NSO), the agriculture sector growth for FY 2020-21 is estimated at 3.4 per cent against 4.0 per cent in FY 2019-20. Also, mining sector estimate stood at (-)12.4 per cent for 2020-21 from 3.1 per cent in 2019-20.

India’s real GDP in the ongoing financial year 2020-21 is seen contracting by 7.7 per cent from a growth rate of 4.2 per cent in 2019-20, according to the first advance estimates of GDP released by the Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation (MoSPI).

The contraction in the economy is mainly on account of the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

“Real GDP or GDP at Constant Prices (2011-12) in the year 2020-21 is likely to attain a level of Rs 134.40 lakh crore, as against the Provisional Estimate of GDP for the year 2019-20 of Rs 145.66 lakh crore, released on 31st May 2020,” the MoSPI release said.

The Real GVA at Basic Prices is estimated at Rs 123.39 lakh crore in 2020-21, as against Rs 133.01 lakh crore in 2019-20, thereby showing a contraction of 7.2 percent.

According to the MoSPI data, the agriculture sector growth for FY 2020-21 is estimated at 3.4 per cent against 4.0 per cent in FY 2019-20. Also, mining sector estimate stood at (-)12.4 per cent for 2020-21 from 3.1 per cent in 2019-20.

In case of manufacturing sector, FY 2020-21 estimate stood at (-)9.4 per cent compared to 0.03 per cent in FY 2019-20, while the construction sector estimate for 2020-21 stood at (-)12.6 per cent vs 1.3 per cent year ago.

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-India-GDP-estimate

The economy contracted 23.9 per cent in the first quarter (Q1) and by 7.5 per cent in the second quarter.

Generally, the first advance estimates of GDP of a financial year are released before the Union Budget. This data helps in the budget-making process. (Source: The Indian Express)


The above Article can also be read using the link below


India’s 2020-21 GDP seen contracting 7.7%: Govt’s first advance estimate.

Saturday, 5 October 2019

RBI Monetary Policy: Repo rate cut, GDP forecast lowered - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

RBI Monetary Policy: Repo rate cut, GDP forecast lowered.

The drop in the central bank's outlook is more glaring if the entire rate cut cycle is considered.

Taking cognisance of the worsening slowdown, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Friday cut its economic growth forecast for 2019-20 to 6.1 per cent, a huge downward revision of 80 basis points (bps) from the projection it made in the August policy meeting. If this turns into reality, India’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth will be the lowest since 2012-13, which could severely hit job creation and income growth in the near term. To achieve even this target, the economy will need to grow at 7 pet cent in the second half of the financial year.
The drop in the central bank’s outlook is more glaring if we look at the entire rate cut cycle. Over the eight months since February, the RBI has cut its growth forecast by 130 bps from 7.4 per cent to 6.1 per cent now.
The policy repo rate was cumulatively eased by 135 bps in this period (to 5.15 per cent now). One bps is a hundredth of a percentage point.
The RBI expects the economy to grow at 6.6-7.2 per cent in the second half of the financial year (October-March). In the quarter ended September, it has estimated, the economy grew at 5.3 per cent, compared to 5 per cent in the June quarter. Commenting on the reform spree measures undertaken by the finance ministry, including the corporate tax rate cut, the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) said: “While the recent measures announced by the government are likely to help strengthen private consumption and spur private investment, the continuing slowdown warrants intensified efforts to restore the growth momentum.”
The MPC signalled the government that more was needed on the policy front to arrest the slowdown. “With inflation expected to remain below target…there is policy space to address growth concerns by reinvigorating domestic demand,” it said.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-RBI-Monetary-Policy-GDP
In addition to the stalled manufacturing activity, Governor Shaktikanta Das said services activity, too, weakened in July-August. But he also suggested the areas that could show the way forward. “Consumer non-durables and intermediate goods have posted sustained expansion during 2019-20 so far and have emerged as potential growth drivers,” he said in his statement. Further, growth in the farm sector could improve, as sufficient water availability in dams would ramp up rabi output, he said.
Experts termed the downward revision as a clear admission of a severe slowdown by the RBI, but also warned that the actual growth could print even lower than its revised estimate.
“It confirms the growth fears all around. Revival is a gradual process and the grind up is not likely to be visible in the next 2-3 quarters. GDP growth is more likely to pan out in the range of 6-6.5 per cent over the coming quarters and, if conditions improve materially, will reflect in headline numbers only in the next fiscal year,” said Rajni Thakur, economist at RBL Bank.
ICRA said the “substantial cut” in the GDP growth forecast suggested a limited likelihood of immediate revival.
With the repo rate being cut to 5.15 per cent and inflation just above 3.2 per cent, the real (policy) interest rate has inched below 2 per cent for the first time since the slowdown started becoming visible, and the rate cycle turned south. This might help revive investment cycle and complement the measures taken by the government, officials said.
But the governor expressed worry on the overhang of “pessimism over global growth prospects”. (Source: The Business standard)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

RBI Monetary Policy: Repo rate cut, GDP forecast lowered.

Saturday, 3 August 2019

India slips to 7th position in global GDP ranking - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

India slips to 7th position in global GDP ranking.

• India is the seventh-largest economy (GDP of $2.72 trillion) with the UK ($2.82 trillion) and France ($2.77 trillion) ahead in the pecking order
• The top economies in the list include the US ($20.5 trillion), followed by China ($13.6 trillion), Japan ($4.9 trillion) and Germany ($3.9 trillion)
India has slipped one notch in the World Bank’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rankings in 2018, and is now the seventh-largest economy with the United Kingdom and France ahead of India, data from the international lending institution said.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-India-GDP-7th-Position
In 2018, India’s GDP was $2.72 trillion, while that of the United Kingdom was $2.82 trillion and France was $2.77 trillion. The world’s top four economies in the World Bank list in 2018 were the United States, with a GDP of $20.5 trillion, followed by China ($13.6 trillion), Japan ($4.9 trillion) and Germany ($3.9 trillion).
The data comes at a time when India has set the target of becoming a $5 trillion economy in GDP terms by 2024, and a $3 trillion economy in the current financial year.
In 2017, India had overtaken France as the sixth largest economy. According to news reports, India had also overtaken the United Kingdom for a short while.
In 2017, India’s GDP was $2.65 trillion, the UK’s was $2.64 trillion and France was at $2.59 trillion. But the UK and France seem to have overtaken India again in 2018.
Earlier this year, India lost the fastest growing economy tag, falling behind China. The country grew at its slowest pace in five years at 5.8% during January-March quarter in financial year 2018-19. Growth during 2018-19 declined to 6.8% from 7.2% a year ago.
Currency fluctuations and a slowdown in GDP growth were the key reasons behind the fall in global GDP rankings, said D.K. Srivastava, chief policy adviser at E&Y.
“The main reason is that the (GDP) growth slowed down last year and there are clear signs of continuity in the slowdown. India’s exports have also fallen and remained negative. Domestic demand is subdued. A significant fiscal stimulus is needed right now to revive growth."(Source: Livemint)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

India slips to 7th position in global GDP ranking.

Wednesday, 12 June 2019

Clarification regarding the Statistical reforms and the existing GDP series - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Clarification regarding the Statistical reforms and the existing GDP series .

1.Reports have appeared in a section of media regarding the statistical reforms being undertaken in the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI) and on the existing GDP series.
2.In so far as the statistical reforms are concerned, it is important to note that system reforms are an ongoing process and are necessary for ensuring responsiveness to the changing needs of society. Over a period of time, there have been increasing demands on the statistical system for production of relevant and quality statistics. The Ministry has been accommodating these demands by optimising the available resources and use of technology. As in any system, the advent of technology necessitates reforms in statistical processes and products with an aim to synergise the existing resources so that the system remains responsive. The recent step for the merger of CSO and NSSO was aimed at leveraging the strengths of the two organisations so that it can meet the increasing demands.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-Clarification-Statistical-GDP
3.In 2018, the Cabinet had approved several new activities including the conduct of new surveys on the Annual Survey of Services Sector (for a more elaborate coverage of the services sector), Annual Survey of Unincorporated Enterprises (to get a better understanding of these enterprises, primarily in the informal sector), Time Use Survey (for assessing the time disposition of household members) and the Economic Census of all establishments. All these activities require significant financial and human resources which take time to become available. The immediate requirement of manpower can be addressed through a judicious mix of redeployment of existing manpower resources and outsourcing to professional manpower agencies. The outsourced field staff has also to be rigorously trained before deployment and thereafter effectively monitored. This model is being implemented in the Economic Census and other NSS Surveys. In the last Economic Census conducted in 2013, the State Governments were requested to arrange for staff to conduct the field work, which led to delays in finalising and releasing the results. In the ongoing Economic Census, 2019, MoSPI has partnered with the Common Service Centres (CSC) SPV to undertake the field work, and the officers of National Sample Survey (NSS), State Governments and line Ministries will be involved in close monitoring and supervision of the field work to ensure data quality and good coverage. This is the first time that the rigours of monitoring and supervision of field work exercised in NSS will be leveraged for the Economic Census so that results of better quality would be available for creation of a National Statistical Business Register. This process has been catalysed by the establishment of a unified National Statistical Office (NSO).
4.In the various media reports regarding the restructuring, what has been missed out, in particular, is the fact that MoSPI is giving an increased focus on Data Quality and Assurance by repositioning the existing data processing personnel. The traditional data processing activity required transformation in light of the adoption of Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) and e-schedule technology in NSS. The latter facilitates better and more reliable data capture with in-built validation checks. These changes require re-skilling of the existing data processing personnel so that they can perform the data quality assurance functions. An emphasis is also being given to more use of administrative data sets that have evolved or are evolving, after ensuring their quality and usability in the statistical system
5.In so far as the credibility of data is concerned, the Government of India adopted the United Nations Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics (FPOS) in May, 2016. The Government is thus committed to ensure and secure the autonomy and independence of the statistical system to produce appropriate and reliable data by adhering to internationally agreed professional and scientific standards. In the Indian context, there have been a series of expert committees constituted in the past, which made several recommendations for improving the functioning of the national statistical system. The reforms being undertaken in MoSPI are in consonance with these principles as also the various recommendations of the National Statistical Commission (NSC). In fact, the Ministry had drafted the National Policy on Official Statistics (NPOS) and placed the same in the public domain. Based on the comments received, this policy is being redrafted.
6.The order issued on 23rd May, 2019 aimed at a unified NSO, as prevailing in most other countries, that produces reliable and quality statistical products by leveraging the synergies available within MoSPI. It may also be mentioned that the Government had merged the post of Chief Statistician of India (CSI) and Secretary, MoSPI to head the NSO and order of 23 May, 2019 on restructuring has since been accordingly clarified.
7.The Chairman and Members of the NSC are senior functionaries and are entrusted with the responsibility of improving the national statistical system, and the Ministry duly takes into consideration their recommendations and inputs. The status, role and functions of NSC continue as earlier (Press Release of 31 May, 2019 refers). Efforts are also on to evolve a legislative framework under which the NSC may function with independence and give holistic guidance for improving the national statistical system encompassing MoSPI, the line Ministries and the State Governments.
8.In so far as the GDP series are concerned, the Ministry had issued several clarifications, which need to be duly considered for an informed and balanced view to emerge. In fact, the detailed methodology and approach for the GDP series (new series and back series), are available in the public domain. The detailed Press Release of 30th May, 2019 explained the coverage of the MCA corporate data in the GDP estimates vis-à-vis the NSS (74th Round) Technical Report on services sector with a view to address issues raised in the media on the usage of MCA data. It was explained that the NSS had been conducted this survey to understand the challenges likely to emerge when the Annual Survey of Services Sector is undertaken. The findings were analysed at the macro level and it was noted that majority of the companies had filed their statutory on-line returns with MCA and were not missed out in the GDP estimation. The issue of misclassification was also explained in that the Corporate Identification Number (CIN) has the National Industrial Classification Code embedded which is usually not updated even if a company changes its activity declared at the time of its registration. Before MoSPI undertakes the Annual Survey on Services Sector, these limitations will be duly factored and incorporated in the survey design methodology. These findings will also be used when the GDP series is revised to a new base.
9.It needs to be appreciated that GDP estimation is a complex exercise and is undertaken in an ecosystem of incomplete data. This necessitates complex simulations and statistical assumptions before a methodological approach is finalised in consultation with subject experts. In fact, many of the critics of the current GDP series were involved in the various Committees that deliberated and finalised the 2011-12base revision methodology. It may be noted that the decisions of these Committees were unanimous and collective, and were arrived at after taking into consideration the data availability and methodological aspects before being recommended as the most appropriate approach. The Ministry has conventionally involved a wide range of professional experts in its deliberations and the national statistical system has immensely benefitted from their contributions. In addition, India has subscribed to the Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS) of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and an Advance Release Calendar is decided for release of estimates. The IMF had raised certain issues on the usage of double deflation in the Indian GDP series and India has informed IMF that the existing data availability does not permit its application in India at present. In fact, the media reports, while citing the changes in GDP growth likely to result from adopting the double deflation, realise the varying outcomes obtained by different authors from their own distinct assumptions. It was because of such views that the Advisory Committee on National Accounts Statistics (ACNAS) had not agreed to the use of the double deflation at present stage. Moreover, double deflation is used in only a few countries that have a Producers Price Index (PPI) to deflate the inputs. MoSPI is working closely with Ministry of Commerce and Industry to have the methodology for the PPI finalised.
10.Further, revision in GDP estimates occur when data coverage from administrative sources improves over time and these improvement get well documented. Consequently, the initial estimates of GDP tend to be conservative. To improve this, it would require concomitant changes in the sectoral data flows and associated regulatory framework in the data source agencies to facilitate use of more macro modelling techniques. The Ministry is also proposing to establish a National Data Warehouse on Official Statistics, where technology will be leveraged for using Big Data Analytical tools for further improving the quality of macro-economic aggregates. As all these reforms are an ongoing process, it is important that the readers and users understand and appreciate the limitations of data and the challenges in estimation. While undertaking these reforms, it is important to realise that newer data sets and survey results will invariably be used and it would be incorrect to comment that old processes were better than the new. The reforms being undertaken in MoSPI will lead to better data sets and better estimates in future, and will be duly deliberated on by the ACNAS during the Base Year revision.
11.This is also to clarify on the apparent misconception that in the current GDP series the informal manufacturing sector grew at the same rate as the formal manufacturing sector measured by the Annual Survey of Industries (ASI). In fact, it is only the growth of appropriate type of enterprises in ASI (i.e. proprietary, partnership, HUF) that is used to move the bench mark estimates of the informal/unorganized manufacturing segment, and not the growth of the entire ASI. Moreover, while using the Paid-Up-Capital based scaling up of sample results, MOSPI now uses the much larger MCA database (about 7 lakh active corporates) whereas the results from a sample of only 2,500 corporates analysed by RBI were used in the earlier GDP series.
12.The national statistical system works in an ecosystem of independence and autonomy in its statistical processes. Allusions to any external influence are altogether unwarranted. It has been the endeavour of the Ministry to continue educating users on the various statistical products and processes, which are essentially public goods. In this direction, the Ministry is now making available all primary data collected to the public free of cost. In so far as sharing the external secondary and administrative datasets are concerned, these are governed by various legislations and the researchers may approach the concerned custodian source agencies for more granular data.


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Clarification regarding the Statistical reforms and the existing GDP series

Monday, 4 March 2019

How govt expenditure has pushed up India's GDP growth - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis

How govt expenditure has pushed up India's GDP growth.

• India's GDP is likely to grow at 6.98% in 2018-19 in a year when government expenditure is seen increasing by 8.87%
• Government expediture grew more than GDP between 2007-08 and 2009-10—the peak of the financial crisis
The second advance estimates of national income show that gross domestic product (GDP) is likely to grow at 6.98% in 2018-19. This is the slowest growth in five years, and even this wouldn’t have been possible without fast growth in government expenditure. Mint decodes the situation.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-expenditure-India-GDP
How fast is government expenditure growing?
At the most basic level, GDP of an economy is the sum of private consumption expenditure, investment, government expenditure and net exports (exports minus imports). An increase in any of these pushes up GDP.
Take a look at the above chart. The government expenditure for this fiscal is expected to grow at 8.87%, whereas GDP is likely to grow at 6.98%. In 2017-18, government expenditure grew at 14.97%, while GDP grew at 7.17%. So, an increase in government expenditure basically pumped up GDP growth to a large extent in 2017-18 and to some extent in 2018-19.
When was the last time this happened?
The last time growth in government expenditure was faster than overall GDP growth for two consecutive years or more was between 2007-08 and 2009-10. This was the period before, during and after the breakout of the 2008 financial crisis, when Wall Street investment bank Lehman Brothers went bust, leading to a global economic slowdown. In 2008-09, overall GDP growth was 3.09%, whereas growth in government expenditure was 11.36%. Of course, 2017-18 and 2018-19 have been nothing like the global financial crisis years, but economic growth has still required a major push from the government.
What proportion of GDP does government expenditure constitute?
Government expenditure does not make up for a large part of GDP. Data over the years suggests that it typically accounts for 10-11% of GDP.
How fast is the non-government part of GDP growing?
The non-government part of GDP constitutes around 90%. In the current fiscal, it is expected to grow by 6.76%; in 2017-18, it grew at a rate of 6.32%. The last time the non-government part of the economy grew slower than the overall GDP for two consecutive years or more was between 2007-08 and 2009-10, that is, during the period of the financial crisis. This is another good indicator of the fact that all has not been well with the Indian economy for the last two years.
Why is the rise in government expenditure not pushing up fiscal deficit?
This is because a lot of revenue, as well as capital expenditure of the government, is now kept outside its budget. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) highlighted this in a report. This style of pushing up growth by raising government expenditure is not sustainable. In 2017-18, government expenditure went up 14.97%, while GDP growth was at 7.17%. In 2018-19, it is likely to rise to 8.87% and GDP growth is expected to be at 6.98%. (Source:Livemint)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

How govt expenditure has pushed up India's GDP growth.

Thursday, 28 February 2019

Family planning can boost India's per capita GDP 13% by 2031: Study - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Family planning can boost India's per capita GDP 13% by 2031: Study.

If the existing set of policies are implemented to their fullest, India can see a definitive and sustained improvement in metrics such as reduced infant and maternal deaths, according to the study

India’s per capita gross domestic product (GDP) can rise an additional 13% by 2031 if family planning policies are actively prioritised, according to a new study.This can also prevent 2.9 million infant deaths and 1.2 million maternal deaths and save households Rs 77,600 crore (20%) of out-of-pocket health expenditure on childbirth and child hospitalisation, it added.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-Family-boost-capita-GDP
Currently, family planning gets barely 4% of India’s National Health Mission allocations and this share has been stagnant for several years.
‘Cost of Inaction in Family Planning in India: An Analysis of Health and Economic Implications’ a study by Population Foundation of India, assessed the cost benefit analysis of family planning interventions at the national level and in four populous states--Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. These together make for 37% of the country’s population.
The study showed that India needs to implement the following reproductive health strategies to ensure economic gains:
• Target adolescents and youth;
• Ensure a greater resource envelope for family planning in the health budgets of the Centre and states;
• Adopt a multi-sectoral and community engagement;
• Ensure availability and access to quality reproductive health services;
• Invest in women’s education and job opportunities.
The gains that come through these strategies will be more pronounced in the four populous states, the study estimated.
A push for family planning can also result in cumulative savings of up to Rs 27,000 crore for the National Health Mission budget.
Why family planning is integral for health of women and children
If the existing set of policies are implemented to their fullest, India can see a definitive and sustained improvement in metrics such as reduced infant and maternal deaths, safer abortions, and overall reduction in unplanned pregnancies, according to the study. These will, in turn, result in benefits of magnitude higher than their immediate financial impact.
Globally, access to safe, voluntary family planning is a considered a human right and is central to concepts of gender equality and women’s empowerment. It is also the most effective pathway to unleashing the socio-economic potential of a healthy youth, as proved in this study by Harvard economists David Bloom and David Canning.
A third of east Asia’s economic boom, the study said, can be credited to favorable changes in population size and age structure, centred around smaller family sizes. This "demographic dividend", as per estimates, can see nations such as Kenya, Nigeria and Senegal increase their per-capita income by 47% to 87% by 2050 by satisfying their unmet need for family planning.
Family planning offers returns on investment as high as 120 times in terms of the economic benefits it brings through healthcare, according to this study published by the independent Copenhagen Consensus Center in 2014. In marketing jargon, globally family planning is thus considered a “best buy”.
Family planning can deliver the demographic dividend India seeks
Currently wealthy nations in Europe and the Americas are dealing with the economic impact of a rapidly ageing population but India has the largest cohort of young people the world has ever seen. Adolescents and youth (10-24 years) constitute about 1.82 billion (or 26.3%) of the total population in the world. Against this, India’s young population is 364.6 million (30.1%), as per Census 2011.
India's youth-centric population structure is a powerful asset as it frees up household and state resources that would otherwise be used to support dependent groups. These resources can instead be invested to improve their productivity and to generate economic growth, the study said.
So how does strategic family planning ensure that the young stay productive? It allows them to stay healthy and free of reproductive, sexual and mental health issues and ensures that they stay in school and complete education. It gives them the freedom to enter the job market or start their own enterprise, be more productive at work, increase savings and prioritise spending on things that improve their lives.
It also allows the young to start a family at a time when they can offer the best opportunities for their children.
The gains from increased investment on family planning include budgetary savings to the government, increase in per capita GDP and savings on out-of-pocket expenditure to households, as per a recent study by the Population Foundation of India.
Return On Investment From Savings Achieved Via Family Planning
• Rs 27,000 crore: Cumulative savings to the National Health Mission budget
• Rs 77,600 crore: Households savings from out-of-pocket health expenditure
• Rs 6,000 crore: Maternal health programmes
• Rs 3,000 crore: Immunisation costs
• Rs 300 crore: Child health programmes
• Up to Rs 550 crore: Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram
• Rs 79 crore: Adolescent health programmes
• Rs 4,250 crore: Savings on medical supplies and equipment for maternal, child and adolescent health
More focus needed on related issues--marriage and maternity
As early as 1952, India had launched its own family planning programme, ahead of many nations in this regard. Today, India takes the “cafeteria approach” to family planning which means that it provides multiple choices--eight contraceptive options for men and women at different life stages. These include six spacing methods and two permanent methods. Further, in recent years, the government has pledged to increase investments for family planning: At the 2012 London Summit on family planning, India committed to invest $2 billion and then renewed its commitment for the same in 2017, promising a $3 billion outlay.
Of the funds available for family planning, 80% is directed towards terminal methods of preventing conception, specifically female sterilisation. But family planning investments must also focus on expanding the range of family planning choices for women while addressing inter-linked determinants such as child marriage, age of marriage and adequate spacing between births, according to the study.
For sustained engagement, there is a need to increase the allocation for family planning, especially in states with high total fertility rate. Efforts are required to simultaneously involve community engagement, combining best practices from social and behaviour change initiatives. The budget boost must also be specifically aimed at spacing methods to cater to the needs and preferences of young people.
Both men and women need to be decision makers
A proactive, and results-oriented approach involves more than the public sector's prescriptivism, but a mindset change which openly embraces that both men and women as equal decision makers in a family is needed, according to the Cost of Inaction in Family Planning in India study. This can ensure the 120 times result mentioned earlier.
India has a massive reproductive age population, and simply cannot afford a step-by-step, graduated rollout of policies and aid, the study said. For swift impact, the first line of intervention must be in providing care and access to reproductive health. But the speed and scale of family planning interventions need to be stepped up, beginning with substantial increases in investments to improve access and quality of services, particularly for spacing methods of contraception. (Source: The Business Standard - Republished without any modifications)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Family planning can boost India's per capita GDP 13% by 2031: Study

Sunday, 9 December 2018

Climate actions can save India 3 times its GDP, but rich nations must pay - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Climate actions can save India 3 times its GDP, but rich nations must pay.

India's emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) grew 6% a year over 16 years to 2016, faster than China's 3.2% and the world's average 1.3%.

India can save three times its gross domestic product (GDP) and help the world save a million lives a year if it scales up its climate actions to help the global community limit global average temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (oC), said a World Health Organization (WHO) study released on December 5, 2018. This is a more ambitious target than the 2oC agreed under the Paris Agreement in 2015.
ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-Climate-actionsn-nations
Doing this would require massive investment, but historical emitters--the rich, industrialised countries--have failed to make good their commitments to provide funds under the Paris Agreement. “The present scope, scale and speed of climate finance are not only insufficient but not even being discussed properly,” said a paper released by India’s finance ministry on December 4, 2018, timed to coincide with the ongoing 24th Conference of Parties (COP24) of the United Nations Convention on Climate Change in Katowice, Poland.
India has always championed the developing countries’ demand that historical climate change culprits should pay for mitigation and adaptation. In 2009, at COP15, developed countries agreed to channel $100 billion (equal to the GDP of Delhi) every year by 2020 to help developing countries mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects. The Paris Agreement of 2015 required rich countries to review and scale up this amount from 2025 onwards.
Now, as world leaders thrash out a “rulebook” for implementing the Paris Agreement--the procedures, guidelines and institutional mechanisms for monitoring, reporting and verification of climate change goals--climate financing and finance accounting should be front and centre of the discussions, the paper said.
Developed countries have not made good their commitment
Upto 2017, developed countries had met only 12% of their financial obligations, according to the Indian finance ministry paper. It accused developed countries of using dodgy accounting methods to inflate their financial contribution to $41 billion (equal to the GDP of Uttarakhand state) per year by 2013-14.
“A government of India discussion paper in 2015 noted that [the] only credible number is $2.2 billion in 2013-14, if we restrict to country disbursements of actual climate finance on a concessional basis,” the paper said. The remaining money was either not yet disbursed, or not provided as financial assistance but as loans, etc.
Rich countries are completely failing to meet their commitment, Harjeet Singh, global lead on climate change with the non-profit ActionAid, told IndiaSpend. “Worse, we have seen attempts to pass this commitment off in the form of commercial loans, straddling developing countries with more unjust debt,” he said.
New climate-specific assistance may be just $16-21 billion (for 2018), the finance ministry paper said, adding, “If the finance for development projects that only partially cover climate change were reported more accurately, annual bilateral flows of public climate finance could be between $10 billion and $15 billion lower than reported.”
The UNFCCC guidelines allow much leeway in climate finance accounting, the paper said. Singh of ActionAid agreed: "It is next to impossible to quantify the total amount received under international climate finance…[I]t's very complex with different countries and agencies having their own definitions. Some even count development and infrastructure projects as climate projects.”
Therefore, developing countries such as India say the rulebook being negotiated at Katowice must clarify accounting procedures.
However, the United States--which has already pulled out of the Paris Agreement--the European Union and other developed countries are skirting the issue of climate finance reporting, as the newspaper Business Standard reported on December 6, 2018.
Developed countries say they will not set a date by which they will start providing upfront information on their financial contributions. They have also refused to set a date by which they will review the finances provided to see whether these were adequate, and have also vetoed any proposal that would require assessment of their financial support.
Ironically, even an annual $100 billion support, provided in full, would not be enough, the finance ministry’s paper said. “This goal of $100 billion is a meagre amount in size in contrast to the actual needs assessed for developing countries,” it said, adding that even a simple adding up of all the requirements of developing countries mentioned in their climate action plans submitted to the UN climate body came to around $4.4 trillion--about 5% of global GDP.
“Without real money for real action, the urgent transition the world needs to make will be impossible to achieve,” Singh said.
Where things stand: Warming, India’s goals, and upping the ante
The earth has warmed by 1oC from pre-industrial levels (before the 1800s), and any further increase is expected to have severe effects, from killing 70-90% coral reefs, causing hotter days and more frequently, rising ocean levels and temperatures, increasing the severity and frequency of droughts, setting off more wildfires and cyclones, and so on.
To meet the 1.5oC target, the world must halve its carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 (relative to 2010 levels). But the four biggest polluters with combined 58% emissions--China (27%), United States (15%), European Union (10%) and India (7%)--are set to take carbon emissions to a record high in 2018, with a projected rise of 2.7% over 2017. The projections for India suggest a 6.3% emissions increase in 2018, more than four percentage points above the 2% in 2017.
India’s emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) grew 6% a year over 16 years to 2016, faster than China’s 3.2% and the world’s average 1.3%. India now emits as much CO2 as all of Africa and South America combined, The Economist newspaper said in its December 6, 2018, issue.
At the same time, in 2017, there were 2,726 deaths in India that were directly related to extreme weather-related events--heat waves, storms, floods and droughts. India suffered an economic loss of $13.8 billion as a result, said the Global Climate Risk Index 2019released on December 4, 2018. India has been ranked the 14th most vulnerable nation on a list, which is topped by Puerto Rico, which was ravaged by Hurricane Maria in 2017.
The fight against climate change makes economic sense for developing countries such as India, the index showed--India could save up to $8.4 trillion dollars, about three times its GDP, if it pursues actions to limit global temperature rise to 1.5oC target rather than the 2oC target, the WHO report said.
India had pledged under the Paris Agreement to achieve 40% of installed electricity capacity from non-fossil fuel sources and reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33-35% (from 2005 level) by 2030, among other actions. Both these goals have been nearly attained, IEEFA said.
India has made significant progress towards its intended nationally-determined contributions, to the extent that it is expected to meet the targets a decade ahead of time.
Two of the country's three major climate targets--increased share of renewable energy and reduced emission intensity of its GDP--will be reached 10 years before the 2030 deadline, as per projections by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), US-based think-tank, released on December 3, 2018.
The third major goal--to create an additional 2.5-3 billion tonnes of carbon sinks [reservoirs that accumulate and store carbon dioxide] through the planting of additional forest and tree cover--has remained far off.
India’s forest area rose by 1% over the two years to 2017. And, even this figure is likely exaggerated and includes degraded forests and plantations, FactChecker reported on July 4, 2018.
India must double down on this unmet goal, but that may not be enough. Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific group, has said India’s current goals are not ambitious enough, and are not compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5C.(Source:The Business Standard)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Climate actions can save India 3 times its GDP, but rich nations must pay.

Saturday, 1 December 2018

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

The BJP-led NDA government and the opposition parties are fighting over a set of numbers which is not just economic data but has the potential to be used as a potent weapon in the Lok Sabha polls next year. Yesterday, the government issued revised GDP data for the 2005-12 fiscal years that lowered growth under the previous Congress-led UPA in contrast with recalculated numbers that had been released in August. Why did they do it? What does it mean? What could be its implications? Read below to know:

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-GDP-Series-data
The new base year
From January 2015, the Central Statistics Office (CSO) updated base year for GDP calculation to 2011-12, replacing the old series base year of 2004-05, as per the recommendations of the National Statistical Commission. Base year is carefully selected because of the impact it has on the numbers and the year chosen is usually one in which no serious anomaly was present. The new series includes corporate information from the MCA21 database of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs instead of the results obtained from the RBI study on company finances, which means a more comprehensive inclusion of corporate data in GDP numbers. It also helps improve accuracy, particularly for the services sector, which accounts for about 60 per cent of GDP.
Why is base year changed?
Change of base year to calculate GDP is done in line with the global exercise to capture economic information accurately. Ideally, the base year should be changed after every five years to capture the changing economy. GDP based on 2004-05 did not reflect current economic situation correctly. The new series is also compliant with the United Nations guidelines in System of National Accounts-2008. It takes information for the corporate sector and has better estimates of the unorganised sector from 2010-11 National Sample Survey on unincorporated enterprises and data on sales and service taxes.
What is GDP back series?
After the base year is changed, the GDP in previous years is revised according to the new base year for a fair comparison. The back series that the government released yesterday adjusts GDP numbers for fiscal years 2005-12 using new methodology with FY12 as the base year.
The back series shows that GDP growth in the UPA years was slower with the peak of 10.3% in FY11 — now scaled back to 8.5%. According to the back series, the four years of the current government show higher average growth than that achieved during the UPA years. The average growth for the UPA years after the back-series revision for FY06 to FY12 declines to 6.82% from 7.75% earlier, well below the 7.35% clocked during the four years of the present government.
Why are opposition leaders criticising the numbers?
The reason why opponents have criticised this GDP revision methodology is another such attempt carried out in August this year. The August recalibration had thrown up different numbers, showing the previous UPA governments doing better than the present NDA government. The August numbers had been calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee set up by the National Statistical Commission. That recalculation bumped up growth during the UPA years based on the so-called production-shift method. That showed growth to be faster in FY04-FY12 and lower before that in 1994-95, triggering a war of words between the BJP and Congress, with the latter claiming India did better under the UPA.
That's why now the opponents, especially the Congress leaders, are criticising the new numbers. “In its desperate attempt to rewrite GDP data, the government resembles the student who cannot pass an exam without cheating,” Congress leader Ahmed Patel said. Former finance minister P Chidambaram said the revised GDP numbers were "a bad joke".
What is the government's defence?
The government says that the August numbers — which had bumped growth during the UPA regime — were not actual but experimental. It says the GDP back series issued by the the Sudipto Mundle committee amounted to “experimental results” meant to facilitate a decision on the approach to be followed and were not official estimates. It says the back-series GDP data is the result of hard work of CSO officials who had recalibrated the growth figures, and that these numbers were thoroughly vetted by leading economists before being made official. Refuting opposition's charges that growth rate of UPA has been revised lower on the directions of the government, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said today the CSO was a highly credible organisation and maintains arms length distance from Finance Ministry. "UPA had welcomed CSO decision when it revised FY13, FY14 GDP growth upwards. The same yardstick has been applied by CSO while revising growth downwards," the finance minister said.
What do experts say?
Former chief statistician Pronab Sen has questioned the involvement of Niti Aayog. “Involving Niti in the GDP story is strange. It gives out signals that CSO (Central Statistics Office) lacks capability while the Aayog has all the intellectual prowess,” an economist, who did not want to be identified, told ET.
However, the chief statistician has said that the back series was compiled by CSO and it was just a joint press conference with Niti Ayog. According to many independent experts, the new numbers don't alter the overall trajectory. “Directionally, the new series is similar to the old series, which suggests that the latter was not misleading the policymakers on whether the pace of growth was accelerating or slowing down,” said Aditi Nayar, principal economist, ICRA. Devendra Kumar Pant, chief economist, India Ratings, said the data showed minor change. “Even this data shows deceleration in investment rate from 39.8% in FY11 to 30.6% in FY18 and decline in gross savings rate to 29.6% in FY17 from 36.2% in FY11. These are major economic challenges which Indian economy is currently facing,” he said.
Political implications
When GDP back series numbers calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee came out in August, the Congress leaders gloated that it was conclusively proven that the UPA government had done better than the current NDA government. However, the final numbers released yesterday show the opposite. These numbers will certainly become a potent political weapon for the BJP which can claim it had performed better on the economic front than the previous UPA government (Source: The Economic Times)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

The BJP-led NDA government and the opposition parties are fighting over a set of numbers which is not just economic data but has the potential to be used as a potent weapon in the Lok Sabha polls next year. Yesterday, the government issued revised GDP data for the 2005-12 fiscal years that lowered growth under the previous Congress-led UPA in contrast with recalculated numbers that had been released in August. Why did they do it? What does it mean? What could be its implications? Read below to know:

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-GDP-Series-data
The new base year
From January 2015, the Central Statistics Office (CSO) updated base year for GDP calculation to 2011-12, replacing the old series base year of 2004-05, as per the recommendations of the National Statistical Commission. Base year is carefully selected because of the impact it has on the numbers and the year chosen is usually one in which no serious anomaly was present. The new series includes corporate information from the MCA21 database of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs instead of the results obtained from the RBI study on company finances, which means a more comprehensive inclusion of corporate data in GDP numbers. It also helps improve accuracy, particularly for the services sector, which accounts for about 60 per cent of GDP.
Why is base year changed?
Change of base year to calculate GDP is done in line with the global exercise to capture economic information accurately. Ideally, the base year should be changed after every five years to capture the changing economy. GDP based on 2004-05 did not reflect current economic situation correctly. The new series is also compliant with the United Nations guidelines in System of National Accounts-2008. It takes information for the corporate sector and has better estimates of the unorganised sector from 2010-11 National Sample Survey on unincorporated enterprises and data on sales and service taxes.
What is GDP back series?
After the base year is changed, the GDP in previous years is revised according to the new base year for a fair comparison. The back series that the government released yesterday adjusts GDP numbers for fiscal years 2005-12 using new methodology with FY12 as the base year.
The back series shows that GDP growth in the UPA years was slower with the peak of 10.3% in FY11 — now scaled back to 8.5%. According to the back series, the four years of the current government show higher average growth than that achieved during the UPA years. The average growth for the UPA years after the back-series revision for FY06 to FY12 declines to 6.82% from 7.75% earlier, well below the 7.35% clocked during the four years of the present government.
Why are opposition leaders criticising the numbers?
The reason why opponents have criticised this GDP revision methodology is another such attempt carried out in August this year. The August recalibration had thrown up different numbers, showing the previous UPA governments doing better than the present NDA government. The August numbers had been calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee set up by the National Statistical Commission. That recalculation bumped up growth during the UPA years based on the so-called production-shift method. That showed growth to be faster in FY04-FY12 and lower before that in 1994-95, triggering a war of words between the BJP and Congress, with the latter claiming India did better under the UPA.
That's why now the opponents, especially the Congress leaders, are criticising the new numbers. “In its desperate attempt to rewrite GDP data, the government resembles the student who cannot pass an exam without cheating,” Congress leader Ahmed Patel said. Former finance minister P Chidambaram said the revised GDP numbers were "a bad joke".
What is the government's defence?
The government says that the August numbers — which had bumped growth during the UPA regime — were not actual but experimental. It says the GDP back series issued by the the Sudipto Mundle committee amounted to “experimental results” meant to facilitate a decision on the approach to be followed and were not official estimates. It says the back-series GDP data is the result of hard work of CSO officials who had recalibrated the growth figures, and that these numbers were thoroughly vetted by leading economists before being made official. Refuting opposition's charges that growth rate of UPA has been revised lower on the directions of the government, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said today the CSO was a highly credible organisation and maintains arms length distance from Finance Ministry. "UPA had welcomed CSO decision when it revised FY13, FY14 GDP growth upwards. The same yardstick has been applied by CSO while revising growth downwards," the finance minister said.
What do experts say?
Former chief statistician Pronab Sen has questioned the involvement of Niti Aayog. “Involving Niti in the GDP story is strange. It gives out signals that CSO (Central Statistics Office) lacks capability while the Aayog has all the intellectual prowess,” an economist, who did not want to be identified, told ET.
However, the chief statistician has said that the back series was compiled by CSO and it was just a joint press conference with Niti Ayog. According to many independent experts, the new numbers don't alter the overall trajectory. “Directionally, the new series is similar to the old series, which suggests that the latter was not misleading the policymakers on whether the pace of growth was accelerating or slowing down,” said Aditi Nayar, principal economist, ICRA. Devendra Kumar Pant, chief economist, India Ratings, said the data showed minor change. “Even this data shows deceleration in investment rate from 39.8% in FY11 to 30.6% in FY18 and decline in gross savings rate to 29.6% in FY17 from 36.2% in FY11. These are major economic challenges which Indian economy is currently facing,” he said.
Political implications
When GDP back series numbers calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee came out in August, the Congress leaders gloated that it was conclusively proven that the UPA government had done better than the current NDA government. However, the final numbers released yesterday show the opposite. These numbers will certainly become a potent political weapon for the BJP which can claim it had performed better on the economic front than the previous UPA government (Source: The Economic Times)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

The BJP-led NDA government and the opposition parties are fighting over a set of numbers which is not just economic data but has the potential to be used as a potent weapon in the Lok Sabha polls next year. Yesterday, the government issued revised GDP data for the 2005-12 fiscal years that lowered growth under the previous Congress-led UPA in contrast with recalculated numbers that had been released in August. Why did they do it? What does it mean? What could be its implications? Read below to know:

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-GDP-Series-data
The new base year
From January 2015, the Central Statistics Office (CSO) updated base year for GDP calculation to 2011-12, replacing the old series base year of 2004-05, as per the recommendations of the National Statistical Commission. Base year is carefully selected because of the impact it has on the numbers and the year chosen is usually one in which no serious anomaly was present. The new series includes corporate information from the MCA21 database of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs instead of the results obtained from the RBI study on company finances, which means a more comprehensive inclusion of corporate data in GDP numbers. It also helps improve accuracy, particularly for the services sector, which accounts for about 60 per cent of GDP.
Why is base year changed?
Change of base year to calculate GDP is done in line with the global exercise to capture economic information accurately. Ideally, the base year should be changed after every five years to capture the changing economy. GDP based on 2004-05 did not reflect current economic situation correctly. The new series is also compliant with the United Nations guidelines in System of National Accounts-2008. It takes information for the corporate sector and has better estimates of the unorganised sector from 2010-11 National Sample Survey on unincorporated enterprises and data on sales and service taxes.
What is GDP back series?
After the base year is changed, the GDP in previous years is revised according to the new base year for a fair comparison. The back series that the government released yesterday adjusts GDP numbers for fiscal years 2005-12 using new methodology with FY12 as the base year.
The back series shows that GDP growth in the UPA years was slower with the peak of 10.3% in FY11 — now scaled back to 8.5%. According to the back series, the four years of the current government show higher average growth than that achieved during the UPA years. The average growth for the UPA years after the back-series revision for FY06 to FY12 declines to 6.82% from 7.75% earlier, well below the 7.35% clocked during the four years of the present government.
Why are opposition leaders criticising the numbers?
The reason why opponents have criticised this GDP revision methodology is another such attempt carried out in August this year. The August recalibration had thrown up different numbers, showing the previous UPA governments doing better than the present NDA government. The August numbers had been calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee set up by the National Statistical Commission. That recalculation bumped up growth during the UPA years based on the so-called production-shift method. That showed growth to be faster in FY04-FY12 and lower before that in 1994-95, triggering a war of words between the BJP and Congress, with the latter claiming India did better under the UPA.
That's why now the opponents, especially the Congress leaders, are criticising the new numbers. “In its desperate attempt to rewrite GDP data, the government resembles the student who cannot pass an exam without cheating,” Congress leader Ahmed Patel said. Former finance minister P Chidambaram said the revised GDP numbers were "a bad joke".
What is the government's defence?
The government says that the August numbers — which had bumped growth during the UPA regime — were not actual but experimental. It says the GDP back series issued by the the Sudipto Mundle committee amounted to “experimental results” meant to facilitate a decision on the approach to be followed and were not official estimates. It says the back-series GDP data is the result of hard work of CSO officials who had recalibrated the growth figures, and that these numbers were thoroughly vetted by leading economists before being made official. Refuting opposition's charges that growth rate of UPA has been revised lower on the directions of the government, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said today the CSO was a highly credible organisation and maintains arms length distance from Finance Ministry. "UPA had welcomed CSO decision when it revised FY13, FY14 GDP growth upwards. The same yardstick has been applied by CSO while revising growth downwards," the finance minister said.
What do experts say?
Former chief statistician Pronab Sen has questioned the involvement of Niti Aayog. “Involving Niti in the GDP story is strange. It gives out signals that CSO (Central Statistics Office) lacks capability while the Aayog has all the intellectual prowess,” an economist, who did not want to be identified, told ET.
However, the chief statistician has said that the back series was compiled by CSO and it was just a joint press conference with Niti Ayog. According to many independent experts, the new numbers don't alter the overall trajectory. “Directionally, the new series is similar to the old series, which suggests that the latter was not misleading the policymakers on whether the pace of growth was accelerating or slowing down,” said Aditi Nayar, principal economist, ICRA. Devendra Kumar Pant, chief economist, India Ratings, said the data showed minor change. “Even this data shows deceleration in investment rate from 39.8% in FY11 to 30.6% in FY18 and decline in gross savings rate to 29.6% in FY17 from 36.2% in FY11. These are major economic challenges which Indian economy is currently facing,” he said.
Political implications
When GDP back series numbers calculated by the Sudipto Mundle committee came out in August, the Congress leaders gloated that it was conclusively proven that the UPA government had done better than the current NDA government. However, the final numbers released yesterday show the opposite. These numbers will certainly become a potent political weapon for the BJP which can claim it had performed better on the economic front than the previous UPA government (Source: The Economic Times)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Revised GDP Back Series data: All you need to know about the new GDP data.

Monday, 20 August 2018

GDP grew in double digits twice in UPA era - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis.

GDP grew in double digits twice in UPA era.

The estimates of GDP and other related aggregates for the period 1993-94 to 2013-14 have been calculated by an NSC committee using a so-called production shift method

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-GDP-UPA-digits
India’s economy grew in double digits twice during the previous United Progressive Alliance government (UPA) under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, 10.23% in 2007-08 and 10.78% in 2010-11, according to back series calculations by a committee appointed by the National Statistical Commission.
However, the average gross domestic product (GDP) growth during late Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s time (1998-99 to 2003-04) has been brought down marginally to 5.73% from 5.9%. Vajpayee, who breathed his last on Thursday, was cremated on Friday with full state honours.
A Central Statistics Office spokesperson, however, said these are “indicative and experimental numbers” and final figures based on sectoral data will be calculated in a month’s time.
The calculations have been made by a sub-committee headed by N.R. Bhanumurthy, professor at the National Institute of Public Finance and Policy (NIPFP), within the committee on Real Sector Statistics headed by Sudipto Mundle, emeritus professor at the institute. Bhanumurthy was tasked to link the old and new GDP series through the back series data, which has been missing since the government shifted the base year to 2011-12 from 2004-05. The missing data had made if difficult for economists to make long-term GDP growth forecasts.
The estimates of GDP and other related aggregates for the period 1993-94 to 2013-14 have been calculated by the committee using a so-called production shift method. An advisory committee on National Accounts Statistics will now go through the calculations before it is finally vetted by the National Statistical Commission.
“While it is interesting to compare aggregate GDP growth, it is equally important to look at what caused it and whether it was supported by sustainable fiscal/monetary policies,” said DK Joshi, chief economist at Crisil Ltd.
From 1994-95 to 2002-03, GDP growth under the new series has been calculated to be lower than estimates under the old series, while between 2003-04 to 2011-12, the economy seems to have grown faster than earlier estimated.
The sub-committee observed that in the case of GDP at market price, the revised series appears to be smooth and comparable to the new series. “However, when we look at the growth rates, there are some differences, although not significant, and this is largely because of the ‘discrepancy’ variable, which is found to be highly volatile,” the committee added.
The real sector committee under Mundle, which also looked into sectoral statistics of agriculture, industry and services as well as micro-macro data linkages, recommended that artificial intelligence-based data cleaning and new big data sources such as internet, and point of sale data, should be used by all statistical authorities across the country for improving the data base of the Indian economy.
The Indian economy grew at the slowest pace in four years at 6.7% in 2017-18 under the twin blow of demonetisation of high value currencies and implementation of the goods and services tax.
The International Monetary Fund has projected that the economy will accelerate to 7.3% in 2018-19 with investment reviving and consumption demand remaining strong.
However, growing external risks such as an intensifying trade war and volatile oil prices may hamper India’s growth story, IMF said. (Source: Livemint)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

GDP grew in double digits twice in UPA era.

Wednesday, 6 June 2018

Centre to start measuring ‘green GDP’ of States - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis

Centre to start measuring ‘green GDP’ of States.

Figures will be used to calculate land acquisition costs, climate mitigation funds

ias-coaching-centres-bangalore-hyderabad-pragnya-ias-academy-current-affairs-green-GDP-states
India’s environmental diversity and riches are universally recognised but have never been quantified. Starting this year, the government will begin a five-year exercise to compute district-level data of the country’s environmental wealth. The numbers will eventually be used to calculate every State’s ‘green’ Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The metric will help with a range of policy decisions, such as compensation to be paid during land acquisition, calculation of funds required for climate mitigation, and so on.
“This is the first time such a national environment survey is being undertaken,” said Anandi Subramanian, Senior Economic Adviser, Union Environment Ministry.
A pilot project is set to begin this September in 54 districts. Land will be demarcated into “grids” with about 15-20 grids per district. These will capture the diversity in the State’s geography, farmland, wildlife, and emissions pattern, and will be used to compute a value, she added.
“If, for instance, there’s a no-go zone, we need to calculate what its economic impact is,” she told The Hindu on the sidelines of a conference to mark World Environment Day on June 5.
Ms. Subramanian didn’t specify the budget for the exercise but said that the funds for the pilot project “were already available.”
Much of the data required for the inventory would be sourced from datasets that already exist with other government ministries.
The government has also launched a ‘green skilling’ programme under which youth, particularly school dropouts, would be trained in a range of ‘green jobs’— as operators of scientific instruments used to measure environmental quality, as field staff in nature parks, and as tourist guides. Some of the labour required for the survey would also be sourced from the green-skilled workforce. (Source: The Hindu)


The above Article can also be read using the link below:

Centre to start measuring ‘green GDP’ of States.

Tuesday, 26 December 2017

The cacophony of GDP numbers - Pragnya IAS Academy - News Analysis


The cacophony of GDP numbers

The formalization of the Indian economy due to GST can boost GDP growth figures to 8% in FY2018.

The impact of ‘normalization’ of the economy may add 1% to real GDP growth in H2 FY2017.

The period from 2011 to 2020 may be called the decade of incomparable gross domestic product (GDP) growth. Due to a battery of events in the last six years, the numbers may not be comparable across time periods and may get revised to such an extent that the revised growth trend may alter. Blanket criticism of the Union ministry of statistics and programme implementation (Mospi) or the government not only misses the nuances of the GDP estimation process but provides a hyper-simplistic explanation, which is incorrect. The author estimates that over the next six quarters, i.e. till Q4 FY19, the GDP numbers reported will initially throw up positive surprises, followed by a period of volatile GDP revisions. Other macro numbers, however, may not improve in tandem. Let us see under what assumptions and scenarios this can play out.

Formalization and normalization to surprise on the upside

The GDP growth estimates of H2 FY2018 will benefit from the lower base of H2 FY2017 as well as normalization of economic activity. In FY2015 and FY2016, the GDP in H2 was 104.3% of H1 GDP for the same financial year. In FY2017, the H2 GDP was 103.3% of H1 GDP. This may be due to demonetization. The impact of ‘normalization’ of the economy may add 1% to the real GDP growth in H2 FY2017. On similar lines, the ‘normalization’ related to the launch of the goods and services tax (GST) may increase the real GDP growth by 1% for Q1 FY2019.

However, the formalization of economic activity attributable to GST will have a higher positive impact on the GDP growth number and, possibly, for a longer period of time. Various economic estimates suggest that India’s parallel economy, i.e. economic activity which is below the official radar and thus not accounted for in GDP measurement, is 25% to 50% of the official GDP value. Arguably, if the entire parallel GDP is formalized in one year, it will give a humongous lift to the GDP growth number, not because economic activity may have improved but because more of it is measured. While the rate of formalization of the economy may be difficult to predict, one may make a range of assumptions and estimate the impact of calculated real GDP growth.

Let’s go with the estimate that the parallel economy is one-fourth of Indian GDP and assume that it will be formalized over a 10-year period. This formalization rate of economy, where more economic activity will get measured, should provide a 2.5% to 3% boost to real GDP growth. So there is a possibility that the H2 FY2018 real GDP growth may be above 8% to 8.5%. The full-year GDP forecast by many forecasters is in the range of 6.7% to 7%, thus building in an expectation of 7.5% plus GDP growth rate in H2 FY2018, given that the H1 FY2018 GDP growth is 5.8%. Moving further into FY2019, this formalization trend would have ensured a 7% real GDP growth floor at least as far as numbers are concerned.

Inadequate data infrastructure to produce ‘shocks’

However, there are risks to this growth trajectory posed by suboptimal data infrastructure for collecting economic data. While GDP estimate revisions are commonplace globally, the high dependence on the availability of periodic survey results, which are delayed, aggravates the problem in India. For the annual survey of industry, the latest available data are the provisional numbers till 2014-15. The 2016-17 survey, which will capture the impact of demonetization and GST, will only be available in 2019, and then we will get a more realistic estimate of FY2017–FY2018 GDP. But the biggest variability in GDP numbers may come in 2018 when the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) survey on household expenditure for 2016-17 will be published. Existing GDP estimates are based on the 2011-12 survey. This input has a significant bearing on estimating private final consumption expenditure, which is 55% to 60% of India’s GDP. This will be incorporated in the GDP calculation from 2019, which may show a very different picture of the GDP’s trajectory from 2013 to 2019.

Nonetheless, the GDP formalization benefit stays. In fact, unless the revised GDP numbers are released in 2019, the GDP growth number may suggest a sustained recovery from Q2 FY18 all the way into FY19-FY20. In this era of yo-yo-ing GDP estimates, but upward bias nonetheless, if other economic indicators such as capex, corporate earnings or job growth do not palpably pick up, then the cacophony about the GDP number may increase.

Travails of a ‘high’ GDP growth number

The recovery of GDP, as may be perceived by the ‘reported’ number in conjunction with stabilizing or upward bias in inflation, may actually create a stronger argument for an interest rate hike, which again may be counterproductive. If the government focuses exclusively on the GDP number, then it may again, in 2019, go back to the ‘India Shining’ mode of 2004. However, it can use the anticipated higher GDP to go for a fiscal push, since the fiscal deficit ratio may continue to remain strong. This may go a long way in reviving the real economy, including jobs, capex and consumer spending, rather than convincing the common man that the economy has recovered because the GDP number is higher.

(Source:livemint)

Thursday, 5 May 2016

Core sector output accelerates to 16-month high of 6.4 %

India's infrastructure sectors has their highest growth in 16 months in March 2016, the story is same for core industries climbing 6.4 per cent, mainly by the output of cement, electricity, fertilisers and refinery products.
Index in March followed a growth of 5.7 per cent in February, leading economists to cautiously consider it a sign of likely recovery in the economy.
Now the question arises:Is this is a sustained trend?
  • This is clearly a sign of recovery setting in the economy. The reforms that took place in both coal and power sectors will start to bear fruit now.
  • The pickup in the cement and refinery products sectors implies demand is picking up, is possibly due to the infrastructure demand being pushed by the Central government.
  • Poor performance of the Manufacturing Purchasing Managers- Index (PMI) in April as being inconsistent with the seemingly sustained growth in the core sectors.
PMI in manufacturing
  • It is unusual that the core sector numbers are up, but PMI in manufacturing has gone down.
  • The data is most unreliable, there is no consistency.
  • Even this growth, of 6.4 per cent, is not very strong, historically.
  • The growth should be in the double digits. But it is showing a pickup, and this is good news.
Growth in the coal sector slowed to 1.7 per cent in March compared to 3.8 per cent in February, while the crude oil sector contracted sharply by 5.1 per cent in March compared to a growth of 0.8 per cent in February.
These numbers are throwing up results that are not in tune with what is happening in the economy.
  • So, one can't say conclusively that the economy is on the mend.
  • §Investment is happening, activity is happening on government-led capital expenditure (capex) in road, rail and defence.
  • But private capex is not really happening.
Another reason why recovery might be premature is that:
  • The strong growth in March 2016 could likely be a result of a base effect brought on by the contraction seen in the index in March 2015.
  • The index of eight core industries contracted 0.7 per cent in March 2015.
  • This data needs to be seen keeping the base effect in sight.
  • To get a more accurate picture, we need to compare March 2016 with March 2014.
  • This comparison shows that the index grew 5.6 per cent in March 2016 over its level two years previously.
Conclusion
  • Sharp rise in cement, electricity, fertiliser and refinery products output
  • The growth should be in the double digits.
  • And one should be careful in using base year.
  • Still it is a good news for economy.
  • All are hoping for sustained increase in growth.

Tuesday, 3 May 2016

Modi launches LPG scheme for poor women

Government has launched the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana. The tagline for the scheme is Swachh Indhan, Behtar Jeevan.
About the Scheme
  • It aims to provide five crore LPG connections to women in Below Poverty Line (BPL) households over the next three financial years, at a cost of Rs. 8,000 crore.
  • Under PMUY, each of the beneficiaries will receive monetary support of about 1,600 rupees to get a connection of cooking gas. It includes administrative cost, pressure regulator booklet and safety hose.
  • It is being implemented by Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. It is for the first time this ministry is implementing a welfare scheme.
Funding of the Scheme
  • The scheme is to be partially funded from the savings accruing to the government from LPG users who gave up their subsidy as part of the Give It Up programme.
  • Apart from those who voluntarily gave up their LPG connections, those earning Rs. 10 lakh or more a year have been deemed ineligible for the subsidy.
  • Removing the LPG subsidy from these people would save the government Rs. 173 crore a year.
Expansion plans
  • Nearly 10,000 new distributorships and infrastructure expansion plans were in the works to cater to the increased demand arising out of the new connections.
  • The households will be selected using the socio-economic and caste census data.
  • Currently, India has 16.64 crore active LPG consumers with a requirement of about 21 million tonnes per annum.
Larger Objective of the Scheme
  • As LPG coverage is being increased, there are serious health hazards associated with cooking based on fossil fuels.
  • According to World Health Organisation estimates, about 5 lakh deaths occur in India alone due to unclean cooking fuels. Experts say having an open fire in the kitchen is like burning 400 cigarettes an hour.
  • Providing LPG connections to BPL households will ensure universal coverage of cooking gas in the country and this will empower women and protect their health.

Tuesday, 26 April 2016

National corridor body plan shelved


Why?
The Authority has been put on the back burner due to the delay foreseen by the Prime Minister's Office and the Cabinet Secretariat in getting Parliamentary approval for it to be conferred ''statutory'' status on the lines of the National Highways Authority of India.
About NICA:
  • It was the proposed nodal body to oversee work relating to all national ''industrial corridors'', in the face of hurdles in implementation.
  • The plan to set up NICA was announced by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in his maiden Budget speech in July 2014.
  • The centre had planned to go in for a Constitutional amendment and ensure passage of 'NICA Act' in Parliament. The Constitutional amendment was to remove doubts on whether the topic ?industrial corridor? falls under the ?State List? or ?Union List? of Constitution.
  • The aim was to grant NICA overarching powers including primacy over State bodies on all aspects of ''industrial corridors'' thus allowing it comprehensive operational freedom.
What next?
  • To fill the gap, the government has decided to make the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor Development Corporation (DMICDC) the coordinating body for corridors, to move ahead with proposals relating to corridors in the works.
  • As per the new plan, DMICDC head will have the powers to approve proposals relating to corridors. These will then be forwarded to the DMIC Trust for final clearance.
  • The Trust — currently managed by the Secretaries of Department of Economic Affairs, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion and that of NITI Aayog — could be expanded to include the Secretaries of Shipping, Road Transport and Urban Development (for including ''smart cities'' in these corridors).
Why make DMICDC the coordinating agency?
Making DMICDC the coordinating agency only needs a Cabinet nod and is easier than obtaining Parliamentary approval for NICA.