| |
|
 |
|
| Why
Inflation Still Matters
|
|
|
Dec 13th 2006, Jayati Ghosh
|
|
Perhaps
more than any other purely economic issue, inflation
has always been a pressing socio-political concern in
India. That is because the vast majority of our working
people receive incomes that are not indexed to prices,
and are therefore directly and adversely affected especially
by the rise in prices of necessities. Since money wages
and the incomes of small businesses of the self-employed
adjust to rising prices only with a lag, this means
that their real incomes get eroded over time. So inflation
has direct income distribution consequences.
Of
course, periods of slow price rise are not necessarily
always beneficial, even for the poor. If low inflation
is the result of restrictive macroeconomic policies
that reduce economic activity and employment growth,
it can be even worse for the mass of people than moderate
inflation rates that are associated with rising aggregate
income and employment.
Recent macroeconomic policy discussions have been rather
complacent about the issue of inflation in India, especially
given the relatively low rates that prevailed over much
of the past decade. However, in the past year the increase
in the overall inflation rate, as well as the rise in
prices of particular commodities, have brought into
question both the sustainability of the current economic
growth process and the efficacy of public management
of price rise in particular sectors.
Chart 1 >>
Chart
2 >>
The
charts indicate that consumer prices have definitely
increased in the recent past, such the annual rate of
inflation at present is between 6 and 7 per cent. Movements
in the Wholesale Price Index (WPI) show that the recent
rise has been sharpest in food articles, including food
grains, which still form the most basic of necessary
goods. Indeed, for some commodity groups like pulses,
prices have risen by nearly 33 per cent between January
and November this year.
What
has brought about this recent acceleration of inflation
in the Indian economy? In a statement before Parliament
in July (as reported in the Rajya Sabha proceedings
of 24 July 2006) Finance Minister P. Chidambaram claimed
this was the result of three forces. According to him,
two of these are completely out of the government’s
control.
The first factor Mr. Chidambaram described as the cost-push
effect emanating from the hardening of world commodity
prices, such as oil and other fuels, minerals and metals.
With world prices in these increasing, it is only to
be expected that domestic prices will also rise. However,
in fact global oil prices have been falling in recent
times and are now below the levels of even one and a
half years ago. The same is true of most agricultural
commodities, and of some minerals and metals imported
by India. So cost-push inflation because of higher import
prices is unlikely to explain the rise in Indian prices
after June 2006.
The second factor he mentioned was the demand-pull effect
of higher economic growth, which puts pressure on available
supplies and therefore leads to what he described as
a temporary rise in prices. Certainly there is evidence
that rapid growth in some sectors has put pressure on
raw material supplies and may lead to supply bottlenecks
of particular inputs, including not only raw materials
and intermediates, but also some forms of skilled labour.
However, this process – and the resulting price rise
- is not a necessary concomitant of high growth. It
is worth noting that the Chinese economy has grown very
rapidly for nearly thirty years, with only moderate
inflation. Even in the current year, when the Chinese
economy is apparently growing by more than 10 per cent
in real terms, inflation has been only 1.4 per cent
at an annual rate. So clearly, rapid growth in domestic
demand need not lead to higher inflation.
Further, since China is also a more import-dependent
economy than India, importing a greater proportion of
inputs for manufacturing production, it should have
been more adversely affected by the rise in world commodity
prices that Mr Chidambaram spoke of. Instead, inflation
rates have been lower than in the past!
The third factor that Mr. Chidambaram mentioned is what
he refers to as ''supply shocks'' but which would be
better described as poor management of critical areas
of the economy. Here, in fact, the Finance Minister
probably hit the nail on the head, perhaps inadvertently.
He referred to the mismatch between demand and supply
in important commodities such as wheat, pulses and sugar,
suggesting that unexpected output shortfalls for these
crops led to a temporary rise in prices which would
get mitigated once supplies were enhanced, for example
through imports.
But this is only part of the story. It is misleading
to speak only of crop failures, for what happened was
essentially a policy-created process that was subsequently
mismanaged. The government allowed the entry of large
(and multinational) private players into the grain trade,
and opened up the futures market for trading in these
essential commodities, which all have a history of hoarding.
Having thus allowed for speculation, the government
was then very surprised when it actually happened.
In wheat, for example, the Food Corporation of India
was unable to procure adequate amounts for the public
distribution system because private players like Cargill
were offering higher prices to the farmers. Procurement
declined by nearly 40 per cent compared to last year
and wheat stocks fell by 20 per cent to less than 7
million tonnes. This was not only inadequate for the
requirements of the government in terms of the PDS and
school meals programmes, but also insufficient to quell
speculative activity in wheat markets when prices started
to rise.
Eventually, the government was forced to import wheat
at prices several times higher than what it had been
willing to pay Indian farmers, and in the meantime consumers
had to cope with rising prices of wheat. A similar story
operates for pulses, except that mitigating imports
have not yet occurred so the price rise continues unabated.
This is such expensive incompetence that in any country
with real democratic accountability, heads would have
rolled over this. But in India, ministers can talk glibly
of ''supply-demand imbalances'' as if these were somehow
completely outside the purview of government.
The government is indeed now concerned about inflation,
but unfortunately the knee-jerk response has been to
use the blunt instrument of the interest rate. In the
past months, the RBI’s discount rate has been increased
three times, most recently on October 31. But this affects
all productive sectors alike, and has disproportionately
negative effects upon small enterprises that already
find it more difficult to get bank credit.
Instead of this blanket measure there should have been
more nuanced and directed interventions addressing the
sectors in which speculative bubbles are clearly visible.
The stock market, for example, continues to be irrationally
exuberant, and the imposition of a capital gains tax
at this point could only have a salutary effect, besides
raising more revenue for the government. The real estate
market is clearly overheating – house prices in the
metros are estimated to have more than doubled in the
past two years. Yet the banking system and the income
tax structure continue to encourage property loans.
Clearly, the recent rise in inflation reflects not higher
growth but just economic mismanagement.
|
|
|
Print
this Page |
|
|
|
|