note demonetisation

Demonetisation isn't an inconvenience for poor people – it risks causing a welfare shock

The 'Economy' doesn’t lend, trickle to the poor – or do anything to ease the shock.

I want to make one thing clear. There is a difference between “short-term inconvenience” or pain or difficulty, however you want to call it, and a welfare shock.

Take a very simple empiric: 80% of families in India that are above the poverty line in one year and then fall below it in another, do so because of one illness, to one family member, in one year. Let that sink in please: one, one, one. That’s it. (see Aniruddh Krishna’s excellent “One Illness Away” to read more).

This is the reality of the vulnerability of what is so dismissively called the “cash economy”.

You can replace illness with wedding or funeral and the story still holds. Welfare shocks, as they are called, break cycles of very tenuous security and small economic gains, pushing families back into cycles of debt and depleted savings. They do it because we don’t have enough public welfare protections to guard against small risks and life events – domestic savings are the only floor.

The thing about demonetisation done in this way, where no planning accounts for the “short-term” contraction of the cash economy in a place where 60%-80% of workers work informally, half get paid in cash, and one in every five of them work in cash on daily/weekly wages (see Reserve Bank of India, National Sample Survey data, or the report by theNational Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector) then you aren’t pushing a “short-term inconvenience,” you risk causing a welfare shock.

Do the maths: daily wage workers weigh the opportunity cost of lost wages and risk to continued work (skipping even a day risks not being called back to work with the same contractor) against access to usable cash. This happens for two or three days. Then you need to spend. You borrow, and a new cycle of small debt begins. If in the middle of this, one small other thing happens – just one, say an illness, a puncture in your rickshaw, a sudden off-cycle bribe to the cops for your thela or cart – and you can’t use your savings, then the debt cycle worsens, or you forego other expenditures like food or school fees.

This is not “inconvenience”.

The risk here is that demonetisation will do exactly what illness, accident, eviction, funeral, and drought do to poor families. If you think just faulty implementation can’t do that, you are ignoring how thin the line between stability and crisis is for too many working people in this country.

So debate all you want about whether or not this will hit black money (and let me be honest that I am currently neither convinced by the sell or the critique on that count but that’s for another time), but what makes this move unconscionable for me is that there is no concern whatsoever to think about the consequences for a dominantly small cash economy. Let alone medium-term implications for the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises sector, mid-size employment, and trade but the very real impoverishment effects of short-term crises.

Real risks

I don’t think it is accidental that we did not think the implementation through at all. The implementation seems to reflect the actual exercise at play when you hear Finance Minister Arun Jaitley speak.

Recently, he “regretted hardships” and “advised the public to be patient as the move will have larger benefits for the economy in long term.” In the short run, he said, some “obvious” disruption will be caused. “But once the money is available both in the system and more so in the banking system, the advantages of that to the economy and businesses will be far more. The capacity of the banks with all this additional capital to lend and support businesses is going to be far higher. And therefore medium term and long term advantages to the economy as against this temporary inconvenience or disruption, are far too many,” he said here.

He’s possibly right. The “Economy” of banks, deposits and formal lending will benefit, and do so enormously. The catch is: this is not the economic lifeworld where the shock is. The National Housing Bank says that 75% of all housing loans, to take one example, in the country given by financial institution are above Rs 10 lacs. The “Economy” doesn’t lend, or trickle, to the poor – or ease the shock. You want to connect these two economies, fine. Doing it through coercive deposit exercises will have a short-term effect at best. All the reasons why the poor don’t bank or transact in the formal economy will not change just because you pushed them through the doors this one time. Is chemotherapy really sound economic policy?

That said, let us also challenge any easy critique. There is a need to hit black money. It has real costs, many of them on equity as well as on growth. Some part of any plan to do so will be punitive and have collateral damage. But that is precisely why thinking through what to do must begin itself from the very real risks it poses and to take seriously the current nature and structure of our economies, not the “Economy.”

How to do that is a conversation we must have, if only to not let a welfare shock be described as an “inconvenience”. We are still to see the real impacts – even short-term – of this move, but what it signals for our priorities and approaches to economic change is worrying.

This article first appeared on Kafila.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.