Showing posts with label Public Policy and China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Public Policy and China. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Gurumurthy Kalyanaram on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Retail Business in India: Long-term benefit and Short-term dislocation

Gurumurthy Kalyanaram - Government of India's decision to permit 100 percent foreign direct investment in single-brand retail and a maximum of 51 percent such investment in multi-brand retail business has been received with ferocious opposition from various traders' associations and then entire gamut of political parties.

The proceedings of the Indian Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) have been stalled, and there is a general strike that has been called by the traders' association. Gurumurthy Kalyanaram Lawsuit

Unfortunately, an important policy decision is lost in lot of noise -- both the proponents and the opponents of the proposal have merit in their arguments but all that is lost in the din.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

The American Clean Energy Act, Global Warming and the Position of China and India

The American Clean Energy and Security Act (Waxman-Markey) was recently approved (narrowly) by the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill now goes to the U.S. Senate for consideration.

There are several provisions of the bill -- some are bold and others modest, some progressive and others status quoist. With respect to Global Warming and Carbon emission reduction, the Act mandates, "Starting in 2012, ACES establishes annual tonnage limits on emissions of carbon and other global warming pollutants from large U.S. sources like electric utilities and oil refiners. Under these limits, carbon pollution from large sources must be reduced by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83% below 2005 levels by 2050. To achieve these limits, ACES establishes a system of tradable permits called “emission allowances” modeled after the successful Clean Air Act program to prevent acid rain. This market-based approach provides economic incentives for industry to reduce carbon emissions at the lowest cost to the economy."
Gurumurthy Kalyanaram Lawsuit

So, per ACES Act, the United States is using 2005 as the benchmark, and hoping to reduce the carbon emissions by about 17 percent in 2020. 

Friday, April 17, 2009

On China and India: Governance and Economic Institutions

In addition to the democratization of its polity, and liberalization of its economy, the autonomy and democracy of India’s financial institutions and corporations make India a more alluring investment destination. The norms and regulations of the financial markets, and the enforcement and supervision by Securities Exchange Board of India of these regulations are credible, if not perfect. They have made the Indian stock and bond markets transparent and investor-friendly (Swamy 2005). India’s stronger infrastructure in terms of far more efficient and transparent capital markets is enabling the growth of entrepreneurship and free enterprise (Huang 2006).

Empirical research (Khanna, Kogan and Palepu, 2006) now shows that each successful society develops its own set of governance institutions, standards and practices. While there may some de jure similarity in standards, there is no de facto convergence. India has evolved fairly robust and indigenous governance institutions and standards (e.g., dispute resolution bodies such as courts, recognition and protection of private and intellectual property rights, a well-developed private sector, and a modestly better score on corruption and rule of law in World Bank’s governance indicators) over the last 50-60 years (Swamy 2005, Wolf 2006). It may take China the next 30-40 years to develop its own institutions and standards (North and Thomas 1971, Swamy 2005).