The manufacturing revolution is needed first and foremost to provide a home with kitchen, toilet and a bedroom. This requires civic infrastructure for water supply, sewerage, electricity, and accessible road. The engineering knowhow and raw materials for making this possible exists in abundance within India. What has not been planned is the manufacturing challenge.
Re: needs a planning framework
by Ramesh on Sep 01, 2014 04:49 AM
Since both know-how and materials are available indigenously, the bottleneck is in lack of purchasing power, or rather the inability to price labor rate in fair proportion to price of materials and consumables. This has severely impacted credit delivery. Labor rate in market economy is linked to productivity, but gets reflected only in terms of costs. To plan for planned intervention in order to create a fast growing market economy would perhaps require subsidizing infrastructure creation and credit delivery. Planning for facilitating manufacturing becomes more meaningful when done in this context.
Re: Re: needs a planning framework
by Ramesh on Sep 01, 2014 11:52 PM
Chinese opted for export driven approach. This model may not be really suitable for India; for Indian development requires a consumer driven approach; an idea which would have probably been endorsed by Prof Ranjit Sau of IIMC. To create a strategic planning model consistent with free market economy, would fulfill the dreams of strategy guru C. K. Prahalad, who believed in seeing Indian poor as a vast potential market.
Market economy implies consumer choice; therefore it requires bottom-up approach for the last mile. This implies political approach to planning. Like nested Russian doll, the process be aggregated upwards, with role at each level be distinct and complementary.
a. Leaf level- where actual planning is initiated and work gets done b. Validate feasibility and identify financial shortfall needs c. Provisioning for shortfalls via financial instruments for grants and subsidies d. Linkages to state infrastructure grids and commitments for timely delivery e. Disburse financial instruments only at leaf level per plan progress
The financial instruments ideally should be legally redeemable or discountable only by complying manufactured products covered by BIS standard numbers outlined in the plan. The Leaf level has to be an aggregation level where the privacy of ownership of the asset creation can be uniquely established.
Re: Re: Re: needs a planning framework
by Ramesh on Sep 02, 2014 03:25 AM
Unlike Gosplan on which the Planning Commission was based, Leaf-plan is a need based demand pull strategy and integrates well with market economy. The planning process creates purchasing power within a competitive setting for manufacturing sector.
The non-leaf levels of planning structure are well defined processes which do not specify the execution of the plan itself. These non-leaf processes are replicable for various kinds of project delivery. Implementation expertise for these processes is of medium order.
The budget outlay and subsidy planning to make such effort feasible and viable are domains where very sophisticated expertise is required. Such analysis will be analogous to Social Cost Benefit analysis.
yes, chinese seem good at creating products for GLOBAL markets (though they might not create the underlying technologies) even places like singapore and hongkong basically are value-adding places...and look how well they are doing! conclusion:theres a lot of money to be made in value adding or assembling or innovating an existing product.this is where chinese are making BILLIONS !!!! (even if India does somehow get into the manufacturing fast lane..it still needs the people who can make rapid fine tuning changes to products that Global markets need regularly..the chinese do this almost like having a coffee)
