The Political Economy of Public Sector Reform and Privatization 2019
DOI: 10.4324/9780429313707-16
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Politics of Economic Liberalization in India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
66
0
3

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
66
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…This process has led to what Harvey terms 'creative destruction' of previous institutional frameworks, divisions of labour, social relations, and welfare provisions, among other things (2005: 3). Neoliberalism in India -usually referred to as liberalisation and closely tied to the maturation of India's democracy (Kumar, 2008) -has been undertaken in uneven and often paradoxical ways since 1991, driven by internal and external political forces and has been analysed at length from scholars in a number of disciplines (see Aghion et al, 2008;Bhaskar and Gupta, 2007;Corbridge and Harriss, 2000;Kohli, 2006;Sengupta, 2009). In a general sense, liberalisation has compelled a shift in the role of the state as provider under Nehruvian socialism to a champion for private investment and market penetration, albeit with extreme variation at the federal and local levels and in different sectors of the economy and society.…”
Section: New India and Its Frontiermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This process has led to what Harvey terms 'creative destruction' of previous institutional frameworks, divisions of labour, social relations, and welfare provisions, among other things (2005: 3). Neoliberalism in India -usually referred to as liberalisation and closely tied to the maturation of India's democracy (Kumar, 2008) -has been undertaken in uneven and often paradoxical ways since 1991, driven by internal and external political forces and has been analysed at length from scholars in a number of disciplines (see Aghion et al, 2008;Bhaskar and Gupta, 2007;Corbridge and Harriss, 2000;Kohli, 2006;Sengupta, 2009). In a general sense, liberalisation has compelled a shift in the role of the state as provider under Nehruvian socialism to a champion for private investment and market penetration, albeit with extreme variation at the federal and local levels and in different sectors of the economy and society.…”
Section: New India and Its Frontiermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most of these policies were later liberalized. In the 1980s, restrictions on imports of capital goods and on production capacity were relaxed, and targeted FDI became more widely used (Rodrik and Subramanian 2004;Kohli 2006;Nayyar 2006). A more dramatic shift came with the 1991 reform.…”
Section: Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FDI was allowed in the majority of sectors (at first up to 49 per cent and later up to 100 per cent of ownership). Industrial location policy and the Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Act were abolished (Kohli 2006;Felipe et al 2013). Trade was gradually liberalized-the average weighted tariff fell from 83 per cent in 1990 to 14.5 per cent in 2005.…”
Section: Indiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ao mesmo tempo, a Índia apoiou secretamente as revoltas em Bangladesh com fundos, treinamentos e equipamentos e, em retaliação, o Paquistão declarou guerra à Índia.A vitória militar de Gandhi sobre o Paquistão foi muito popular na Índia. Assim, nas eleiçõesde 1972, o Partido do Congresso (R), obteve uma vitória esmagadora com uma maioria de dois terços do voto popular(WALSH, 2006).A partir do final da década de 1960, o governo passou a criar uma série de dispositivos legais, que tornariam a Índia um dos regimes de investimento externos mais restritivos do mundo fora do bloco as empresas grandes e não as pequenas ou médias empresas privadas em áreas estratégicas 7(KOHLI, 2006).Para Rodrik e Subramanian (2008), essas políticas seriam um indicativo de mudança de atitude do governo, de hostil a favorável aos negócios, 8 iniciada ainda por Indira Gandhi e reforçada por Rajiv Gandhi após sua ascensão ao poder em 1984. Essa mudança é caracterizada pelos autores como o gatilho que possibilitou o crescimento econômico indiano na nova ordem mundial que se instaurara a partir 1991.…”
unclassified
“…O limite da Lei MRTP foi elevado de US$ 4,3 milhões para US$ 21,5 milhões e liberou cerca de 27 indústrias de seguir essa lei (GANGULY; MUKHERJI, 2011). A própria diluição da Lei MRTP, que limitava o crescimento das grandes empresas, eliminando as restrições de licenciamento, permitiu que as grandes empresas se expandissem em indústrias consideradas como essenciais: produtos químicos, farmacêuticos, cerâmica e cimento(KOHLI, 2006).8 Os autores fazem uma distinção importante entre uma orientação pró-mercado e uma pró-negócio.A primeira se foca na remoção de obstáculos aos mercados e visa atingir esse objetivo através da liberalização econômica, favorecendo os participantes e os consumidores. Em contrapartida, a última se concentra em aumentar a rentabilidade dos estabelecimentos industriais e comerciais estabelecidos, tendendo a favorecer os produtores (RODRIK;SUBRAMANIAN, 2008).…”
unclassified