Vice-Chancellor Professor Siddiqi, Prof. J. Satyanarayana,
Dr. J. Rameshwar Rao, Prof. Purushotham Rao, Prof. Ali Khan, faculty members and
distinguished friends,
I am honoured by the kind invitation
of the Vice-Chancellor to me to be the Chief Guest and to deliver the first
Diamond Jubilee lecture of the Department of Commerce, Osmania University. I
specifically owe a deep debt of gratitude to Osmania University and I have also
been proud to acknowledge it.
In August 1960, Prof. V. V.
Ramanadham consented to be my guide for Ph.D. after a grueling test of an essay
on competition, thus making the beginning of my association with the University.
I joined the University as a full-time research scholar and continued with the
research work. I was initiated in to the intricacies and joy of research in
applied economics by the faculty of the Department of Commerce, specially through
the Weekly Seminars in Applied Economics. My first seminar participation was
in February 1962 on monopoly power in India. In these seminars, the participants
used to include the distinguished civil servants, academicians, businessmen,
etc. It also included Mr. B.P.R. Vithal, a highly respected civil servant who
was, at that time, the Registrar of the University and has subsequently become
my esteemed ‘Guru’. The two earliest research articles published by me were
in the quarterly journal "Applied Economics Papers"; one of them as
a co-author, with this publication having a globally distinguished editorial
board. During this period in the University, I came into contact with eminent
persons like Dr. I.G. Patel, later Governor, Reserve Bank of India and Mr. S.
S. Khera, Cabinet Secretary. Subsequently, since Prof. Ramanadham had by then
left for the United Nations, I had the good fortune of being guided by Prof.
G. Ram Reddy and Prof. J. Satyanarayana, which enabled me to complete my Ph.D.
As some of you may know, I
had a second spell in the Osmania University in the academic year 1985-86 when
I came back here as a full time UGC Visiting Professor in the Department of
Business Management, on deputation from the Government of Andhra Pradesh, where
I was a Secretary to the Government. In fact, Prof. Raghuram had then commented
that my spirit had been hovering around here and that I had never left the University.
This stint provided me a break to sit back, contemplate and review my understanding
of the Indian economy. It is this campus, which actually gave me an inspiration
to revisit the relative roles of the State and market in India. This permeated
not only my subsequent academic work in the Administrative Staff College of
India as well as the London School of Economics, but also my participation in
the exciting adventure of economic reforms, particularly the external sector
reforms since 1991. In the 15 years of reforms, we have moved away from crisis
management in the external sector to a confident conduct of public policy. It
is, therefore, useful to review our experience in this regard particularly since
commerce is now a lot more globalised than ever before and is likely to become
even more internationalised in future.
I intend presenting before
you the dynamics of balance of payment in India since independence and will
conclude with a few remarks on the way forward. Normally, I do not take recourse
to detailed tables, charts, etc., but in this case, I will be using several
tables. I am doing it as a tribute to Prof. Ramanadham who always insisted that
there should not be a single superfluous word and every sentence should emanate
from solid data presented with specific objectives, scope, limits and methodology.
In a way, therefore, my address today is dedicated to Prof. Ramanadham.
At the time of independence, higher
imports and capital outflows, led by partition, resulted in significant deficit
in the balance of payments necessitating running down of the accumulated sterling
balances. As the country embarked upon the planned development in the fifties,
rapid industrialisation of the country through development of basic and heavy
industries guided the industrial and trade policies during the First (1951-56)
and the Second (1956-61) Five-Year Plans. 'Import substitution' was recognised
as the appropriate strategy for rapid industrialisation.
Export pessimism permeated the
policy stance throughout the early decades of our Planning. This thinking was
based on the four premises, which were considered appropriate at that time.
First, it was believed that only after industrialisation had proceeded some
way that increased production would be reflected in larger export earnings.
Secondly, it was argued that given the large domestic market, exports need not
be an engine of growth. Thirdly, growth in external demand for India's products
was likely to be inelastic because of the traditional nature of our exports.
Finally, there was what was known as the Prebisch-Singer argument that primary
commodity exports face a secular deterioration in the terms of trade. Accordingly,
exports were regarded as a residual, a vent-for-surplus on those occasions when
such surpluses were available.
The inward looking industrialisation
strategy during the first three Plans resulted in higher rate of industrial
growth. However, the signs of strain in the balance of payments were clearly
visible in the Second Plan (see Table 1 attached for trends in India's current
account). As the import demand surged on account of development of heavy industries,
current account deficit (CAD) in the Second Plan surged to 2.3 per cent of GDP.
The difficulties in financing fast growing imports with stagnant exports put
considerable strain on reserves as import cover of reserves (or foreign currency
assets) plunged to barely two months’ by the terminal year of the Second Plan.
In the Third Plan, improved export performance and slowdown in import demand
led to some improvement in CAD and at the same time the financing requirements
were met through stepping up of official assistance.
The Third Plan reflected the first
signs of rethinking in the policy strategy by dedicating itself to ‘self sustaining
growth’, which required ‘domestic saving to progressively meet the demand of
investment and for the balance of payment gap to be bridged over’. While it
envisaged that normal capital flows will continue, it set out the early indications
of the concept of self reliance by foreseeing a steady reduction in the reliance
on special foreign aid programmes and dispensing with them after a period of
time. A more liberal view of self reliance evolved over the Third Plan with
a shift in stress from 'import substitution' to policy emphasis on 'efficient
substitution of imports'. However, in reality, until the end of the 1970s, exports
were primarily regarded as a source of foreign exchange rather than an efficient
means of resource allocation. Though the devaluation of 1966 brought to the
fore the problems associated with the overvalued exchange rate, it did not bring
immediate desired improvement in the balance of payments position. In fact,
CAD-GDP ratio widened to 2.0 per cent during the Annual Plans (1966-69).
Unlike the export pessimism of
the earlier Plans, the Fourth Plan (1969- 74) visualised an aggressive approach
to export growth for achieving self reliance. As a consequence, trade policy
became the primary instrument for achieving a more dynamic concept of self reliance
than what was prevalent in the earlier decades. However, it was in the Fifth
Plan (1974-79) that self reliance was recognised as an explicit objective. In
the Fifth Plan, invisibles surfaced as an important element of the current account
with policy attention on tourism and shipping. Discovering the remittances from
Indian workers as a new source of meeting the growing financing needs, the period
witnessed new confidence in the external sector and prepared the ground work
for take off to the exchange rate regime based on a basket arrangement initiated
since 1975. The fact remains that the phase till the 1970s represented the era
of the dominance of external assistance as a financing instrument in balance
of payments. (See Table 2 for net capital inflows to India).
The second oil price shock was
the precursor of another phase of strain on India's balance of payments. However,
emergence of rising invisible surplus in India's balance of payments helped
neutralise the widening trade deficit. Notwithstanding this, the CAD averaged
1.5 per cent of the GDP in the Sixth Plan. Against the backdrop of second oil
shock, the decade of the 1980s brought the balance of payments position to the
forefront of the macroeconomic management. The Sixth Plan (1980-85) emphasised
the strengthening of the impulses of modernisation for the achievement of both
economic and technological self reliance. The Seventh Plan (1985-90) noted the
conditions under which the concept of self-reliance was defined earlier, particularly
in the preceding Plan. It conceptualised self-reliance not merely in terms of
reduced dependence on aid but also in terms of building up domestic capabilities
and reducing import dependence in strategic materials. Achievement of technological
competence through liberal imports of technology was also envisaged. Alongside,
the winds of change were added by the recommendations of a number of committees
set up during the late 1970s and the 1980s.
Some critical developments in India's
balance of payments gathered momentum in the second half of the 1980s (i.e.,
Seventh Plan, 1985-90) that made the management of India's balance of payments
the most challenging task. The Plan targeted to achieve a high growth rate and
recognised that the management of balance of payments was critically dependent
on a sizeable improvement in earnings from exports and from invisibles. It conceptualised
self reliance not merely in terms of reduced dependence on aid but also in terms
of building up domestic capabilities and reducing import dependence in strategic
materials. However, several developments that put severe pressure on the balance
of payments position during the Plan need attention. First, the CAD assumed
a structural character in the 1980s. With underlying expansion in economic activities,
exports and imports grew in tandem, keeping the trade deficit at a high level.
The invisible balance also deteriorated sharply due to stagnation in worker's
remittances and rising interest burden due to building up of external debt.
Second, with flows of external assistance falling short of the financing need,
recourse to costly sources of finance in the form of external commercial borrowings
(ECB), especially short term debt and non-resident deposits, became relatively
large. Third, persistence of high fiscal deficit averaging 8.7 per cent of GDP
(Centre and States) in the latter half of the 1980s, which could be only partly
financed by the private sector surplus, thus, became a cause of deteriorating
CAD. Fourth, higher reliance on monetary financing of deficits also led to rise
in inflation to double digit in the early 1990s, adversely affecting the relative
price competitiveness of India's exports. Some possible misalignment of exchange
rate, thus, resulted in loss of export competitiveness of exports and bias towards
imports.
The rising financing requirements
described above required not only higher recourse to external debt but also
draw down of reserves, which declined to US $ 4 billion by end-March 1990 from
US $ 7.4 billion at end-March 1980. (See Table 3 for India's outstanding foreign
exchange reserve position; and Tables 4 and 5 for components of external debt
and India's external debt indicators, respectively).
The weaknesses in the Indian economy
were exposed by the Gulf crisis of 1990 and ensuing developments. The current
account deficit rose to 3.1 per cent of GDP in 1990-91. Around the same time,
credit rating of the country was lowered, restricting the country’s access to
commercial borrowings and unwillingness on the part of normal banking channels
to provide renewal of short-term credit to Indian banks abroad. As reserves
kept on falling on expectations of an impending depreciation of Rupee, there
was a temporary loss of confidence leading to a flight of Non Resident Indian
(NRI) deposits.
The severity of the balance of
payments crisis in the early 1990s could be gauged from the fact that India’s
foreign currency assets depleted rapidly from US $ 3.1 billion in August 1990
to US $ 975 million on July 12, 1991. I must admit that I entered the policy
circuit in Ministry of Finance, Government of India during this period. As a
result of the crisis, a conscious decision was taken to honour all debt obligations
without seeking any rescheduling and several steps were taken to tide over the
crisis. The steps undertaken towards this objective included, among others,
pledging our gold reserves, tightening of non-essential imports, accessing credit
from the IMF and other multilateral and bilateral donors.
After the Gulf crisis in 1991,
the broad framework for reforms in the external sector was laid out in the Report
of the High Level Committee on Balance of Payments, popularly known as Rangarajan
Committee, as it was chaired by Dr. C. Rangarajan, former Governor of the Reserve
Bank of India and currently Chairman of the Economic Advisory Council to the
Prime Minister. After downward adjustment of the exchange rate in July 1991,
following the recommendations of this Committee to move towards the market-determined
exchange rate, we adopted the Liberalised Exchange Rate Management System (LERMS)
in March 1992 involving dual exchange rate system in the interim period. The
LERMS was essentially a transitional mechanism and a downward adjustment in
the official exchange rate took place in early December 1992 and ultimate convergence
of the dual rates was made effective from March 1, 1993, leading to the introduction
of a market-determined exchange rate regime. (See Table 6 for Movements of Indian
rupee from 1993-94 to 2005-06). The unification of the exchange rate of the
Indian rupee was an important step towards current account convertibility, which
was finally achieved in August 1994 by accepting Article VIII of the Articles
of Agreement of the IMF. Capital account liberalisation started as a part of
wide-ranging reforms beginning in the early 1990s. The Rangarajan Committee
recommended, inter alia, liberalisation of current account transactions
leading to current account convertibility; need to contain current account deficit
within limits; compositional shift in capital flows away from debt to non-debt
creating flows; strict regulation of external commercial borrowings, especially
short-term debt; discouraging volatile elements of flows from non-resident Indians;
gradual liberalisation of outflows; and disintermediation of Government in the
flow of external assistance.
A credible macroeconomic, structural
and stabilisation programme encompassing trade, industry, foreign investment,
exchange rate, public finance and the financial sector was put in place creating
an environment conducive for the expansion of trade and investment. It was recognised
that trade policies, exchange rate policies and industrial policies should form
part of an integrated policy framework if the aim was to improve the overall
productivity, competitiveness and efficiency of the economic system, in general,
and the external sector, in particular.
With the onset of structural reforms
in 1991-92, accompanied initially by severe import compression measures and
determined efforts to encourage repatriation of capital, there was a turnaround
in the second half of 1991-92. Over the next two years (1993-95), mainly due
to foreign investment flows, robust export growth and better invisible performance,
the balance of payments situation turned comfortable and reserves surged by
US $ 14 billion. A combination of prudent and unique policies for stabilisation
and structural change ensured that the crisis did not translate into generalised
financial instability. In the 1990s, the lessons drawn from managing the crisis
led to external sector policies that emphasised the competitiveness of exports
of both goods and services, a realistic and market-based exchange rate regime,
external debt consolidation and a policy preference for non-debt creating capital
flows. These policies ensured that the current account deficit remained around
one per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and was comfortably financed even
as the degree of openness of the economy rose significantly relative to the
preceding decades and capital flows began to dominate the balance of payments.
Since the mid-1990s, the management
of the capital account with emphasis on risk averseness has assumed importance
in the overall framework of macro economic decision making processes. While
the capital account has to continue to perform its conventional role of meeting
the economy’s external financing needs, the massive movement of capital through
globally integrated financial markets imposes new constraints on the content
and goals of policy. The pace and sequencing of liberalisation of capital account
in India has been gradual in response to domestic developments, especially in
the monetary and financial sector, and the evolving international financial
architecture.
In recent years the capital account
has been dominated by flows in the form of portfolio investments including GDR
issues, foreign direct investments and to a lesser extent, commercial borrowings
and non-resident deposits, while traditionally, external aid was the only major
component of the capital account. The compositional shifts in the capital account
have been consistent with the policy framework, imparting stability to the balance
of payments.
In the recent past, there has been
significant liberalisation on the outflows on account of individuals, corporates
and mutual funds recently, consequent upon, among other things, comfortable
level of foreign exchange reserves and greater two way movement in exchange
rate of the rupee. This is reflected in the increasing global operations of
Indian corporates in search of global synergies and domain knowledge. Transfer
of technology and skill, sharing of results of R&D, access to wider global
markets, promotion of brand image, generation of employment and utilisation
of raw materials available in India and in the host country are other significant
benefits arising out of such overseas investments.
With significant opening up of
the capital account, particularly on inflows, there were sustained foreign capital
inflows since 1993-94. The net foreign assets of the Reserve Bank have also
increased warranting open market operations involving sale of Government of
India securities from the Reserve Bank’s portfolio and repo transactions - in
order to offset the liquidity created by the purchases of foreign currency from
the market; though use of cash reserve ratio is not uncommon. A Market Stabilisation
Scheme (MSS) was introduced in April 2004 wherein Government of India dated
securities/Treasury Bills are issued to absorb liquidity. Proceeds of the MSS
are immobilised in a separate identifiable cash account maintained and operated
by the Reserve Bank, which is used only for redemption and/or buyback of MSS
securities.
Importance of Retaining External
Competitiveness and Stability:
The Way Forward
In the present milieu, what are
the issues that acquire considerable importance from the perspective of continued
strengths in balance of payments?
First, the focus of external sector
policy will have to continue to be on maintaining competitiveness in terms of
expansion of our trade in goods and services on a sustained basis. At the aggregate
level, competitiveness can be assessed in terms of trade-GDP ratio, export growth
of both goods and services, and their price competitiveness. Improvements in
infrastructure assume critical importance for maintaining and improving our
competitiveness. We can no longer view external sector competitiveness in isolation
from domestic economy.
Second, the realised product competitiveness
is embedded in the shifts in the commodity composition of India's trade. India’s
export base (i.e., the commodity and country composition) is far more
diversified now than it used to be in the early 1990s. Rising import intensity
of exports is another sign of Indian industry bracing up to higher level of
competition. The preponderance of imports of capital goods in import basket
of India points to industrial capacity expansion with emphasis on quality of
products for domestic consumption as well as exports. The world is moving forward
very fast and hence productivity, increases in India have to equal and exceed
that of the best producer in the world. The benchmark for our competitiveness
in future is not our past but the emerging best in the field globally.
Third, progressive reductions in
peak tariff rates on imports have provided Indian industry access to new technology
and inputs. The positive developments in the external sector enable a further
rationalisation of tariffs with a view moving to a single, uniform rate on imports
and further simplifying procedures in line with best global practices. The current
external environment, including the level of the foreign exchange reserves,
enables such a move to be made with minimal downside risks.
Fourth, in the current international
context, movements in national current account balances are increasingly being
recognised as manifestations of the global imbalances. The empirical evidence
indicates that even current account deficits, which appear optimising from an
inter-temporal perspective or are on account of private sector imbalances, run
the risk of sharp reversals. Hence, the need to keep current account deficits
within manageable limits – an approach followed by India in its external sector
management since the early 1990s. In this regard, It is necessary to recognise
the significance of approach to the Eleventh Five Year Plan 'towards faster
and more inclusive growth' adopted by the National Development Council last
week (9th December, 2006). It is gratifying to note that the average CAD-GDP
ratio indicated is 2.8 per cent for the target growth rate of 9 per cent, thus
ensuring continued comfortable level of current account deficit, as we move
forward.
Fifth, the current account deficit
being the mirror image of the absorptive capacity of the economy should truly
reflect the interplay of productive activities and the domestic absorption.
Looking at the current account deficits from the angle of macroeconomic management,
one should really view the current account, which, represents the demand and
supply of goods and services and reflect the domestic fundamentals of growth
and employment. Keeping these issues in mind, current account deficit (CAD)
has to be viewed in two ways: (i) a conventional measure including all current
account flows, and (ii) an adjusted measure of CAD, where workers' remittances
are excluded from the current account as these represent broadly the exogenous
component not driven essentially by the current pace of domestic activities
and employment. The current account deficit, in a conventional sense, remained
at a moderate level during last three Plans. However, an adjusted measure of
CAD indicates that rapid expansion in domestic economic activities in the recent
years has been reflected in higher absorption through external sector. In this
light, the indicative CAD over the eleventh Five-Year Plan reflects significantly
higher absorptive capacity than what the CAD to GDP ratios indicate. (See Table
7 for adjusted measure of current account balance)
Sixth, the policies for FDI are
critical since relative to portfolio flows they are less volatile. While the
emphasis is on dismantling of regulatory entry barriers, it is necessary to
ensure that they are not portfolio flows in the garb of FDI. It must be recognised
that overall investment climate must be improved so that both domestic and foreign
investors are attracted. In the final analysis, well over ninety per cent of
our investment has to be funded by domestic saving. Hence, generalised improvements
in investment climate are crucial and FDI flows will also be enabled by such
an environment. Overall, consistency in legal framework within the country and
in line with international standards modified to suit our needs, and accompanying
State level reforms would be useful in this regard. Overall, flexibilities are
essential for supply and demand responses to price signals, which are critical
for improving investment climate and more generally, for an open economy that
best serves the national interest.
Finally, the gross volume of capital
account transactions has been rising at a rapid pace, with bi-directional flows.
Capital flows are managed from the viewpoint of avoiding adverse impact on primary
liquidity growth and inflationary pressures. Capital flows are to be seen in
the context of supply response of the economy and vulnerabilities or potential
for shocks. A key issue in managing the capital account is credibility and consistency
in macroeconomic policies and the building up of safety nets in a gradually
diminishing manner to provide comfort to the markets during the period of transition
from an emerging market to an evolved market. This also underscores the importance
of continuing prudential regulations over financial intermediaries in respect
of their foreign exchange exposures and transactions, which are quite distinct
from capital controls.
Let me conclude by thanking you
all for giving me this opportunity and wishing the Diamond Jubilee Celebrations
all the best.
Thank you.
Table 1: Trends in India's
Current Account
(Average for the Plan Period)
|
Plan
|
Period
|
Percentage Growth
|
Per cent to GDP
|
|
|
Exports
|
Imports
|
TD/GDP
|
Net Invisibles/
GDP
|
Remittances/
GDP
|
CAD/
GDP
|
First
|
1951-56
|
0.6
|
7.2
|
-1.0
|
0.9
|
0.5
|
-0.1
|
Second
|
1956-61
|
0.0
|
9.4
|
-3.1
|
0.8
|
0.4
|
-2.3
|
Third
|
1961-66
|
4.7
|
4.8
|
-2.1
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
-1.8
|
Annual
|
1966-69
|
3.6
|
-5.1
|
-2.1
|
0.1
|
0.2
|
-2.0
|
Fourth
|
1969-74
|
10.7
|
9.8
|
-0.7
|
0.4
|
0.2
|
-0.3
|
Fifth
|
1974-79
|
18.2
|
22.7
|
-1.2
|
1.3
|
0.8
|
+0.1
|
Annual
|
1979-80
|
14.7
|
27.0
|
-2.8
|
2.4
|
1.5
|
-0.4
|
Sixth
|
1980-85
|
5.2
|
6.3
|
-3.5
|
2.0
|
1.3
|
-1.5
|
Seventh
|
1985-90
|
11.4
|
9.4
|
-3.0
|
0.8
|
0.9
|
-2.2
|
Annual
|
1990-92
|
3.9
|
-5.1
|
-2.0
|
0.3
|
1.0
|
-1.7
|
Eighth
|
1992-97
|
13.6
|
18.7
|
-2.7
|
1.5
|
2.3
|
-1.2
|
Ninth
|
1997-02
|
5.9
|
3.1
|
-3.2
|
2.6
|
2.8
|
-0.6
|
Tenth
|
2002-07*
|
23.8
|
29.7
|
-3.9
|
4.4
|
3.3
|
0.5
|
|
2002-03
|
20.3
|
14.5
|
-2.1
|
3.4
|
3.4
|
1.3
|
|
2003-04
|
23.3
|
24.1
|
-2.3
|
4.6
|
3.7
|
2.3
|
|
2004-05
|
28.5
|
48.6
|
-4.9
|
4.5
|
3.0
|
-0.4
|
|
2005-06
|
23.0
|
31.5
|
-6.5
|
5.1
|
3.1
|
-1.3
|
*: Includes first four years of the Plan.
TD: Trade Deficit CAD: Current Account
Deficit GDP: Gross Domestic Product at Current
Prices
|
Table 2: Net Capital Inflows
to India
(Average for the Plan Period)
|
(US $ million)
|
Plan
|
Period
|
Net Capital Flows
|
Of which
|
|
|
|
Foreign Invest.
|
EA
|
ECB
|
NRI Deposits
|
First
|
1951-56
|
-18
|
20
|
23
|
-
|
-
|
Second
|
1956-61
|
418
|
48
|
284
|
-
|
-
|
Third
|
1961-66
|
801
|
51
|
825
|
-
|
-
|
Annual
|
1966-69
|
1018
|
46
|
1103
|
-
|
-
|
Fourth
|
1969-74
|
178
|
49
|
188
|
49
|
-
|
Fifth
|
1974-79
|
969
|
13
|
1097
|
177
|
131
|
Annual
|
1979-80
|
1090
|
86
|
813
|
55
|
201
|
Sixth
|
1980-85
|
2042
|
0
|
1149
|
574
|
457
|
Seventh
|
1985-90
|
5821
|
349
|
1825
|
1513
|
1813
|
Annual
|
1990-92
|
5483
|
118
|
2624
|
1852
|
913
|
Eighth
|
1992-97
|
7578
|
4134
|
1456
|
1080
|
1566
|
Ninth
|
1997-02
|
9253
|
5586
|
852
|
2279
|
1739
|
Tenth
|
2002-07*
|
20568
|
14293
|
-575
|
683
|
2111
|
ECB: External Commercial Borrowings. EA:
External Assistance.
*: Includes first four years of the
Plan. - Nil
|
Table 3 : India's Outstanding
Foreign Exchange Reserve Position
(Average for the Plan Period)
|
Plan
|
Period
|
Outstanding Reserve (Average)
|
Import Cover
|
|
|
(US $ billion)
|
Per cent to GDP
|
(In months)
|
First
|
1951-56
|
1.9
|
8.3
|
15.1
|
Second
|
1956-61
|
0.9
|
3.0
|
4.8
|
Third
|
1961-66
|
0.6
|
1.3
|
2.9
|
Annual
|
1966-69
|
0.7
|
1.5
|
3.1
|
Fourth
|
1969-74
|
1.2
|
1.7
|
5.2
|
Fifth
|
1974-79
|
4.1
|
3.5
|
6.7
|
Annual
|
1979-80
|
7.4
|
4.9
|
7.3
|
Sixth
|
1980-85
|
5.5
|
2.9
|
4.1
|
Seventh
|
1985-90
|
5.6
|
2.1
|
3.4
|
Annual
|
1990-92
|
7.5
|
2.8
|
3.9
|
Eighth
|
1992-97
|
20.5
|
6.4
|
6.9
|
Ninth
|
1997-02
|
39.3
|
9.0
|
8.7
|
Tenth
|
2002-07*
|
120.5
|
17.9
|
14.3
|
*: Pertains to first four years of the Plan. |
Table 4: Share of Major Components
in India's External Debt
|
Year
(End-
March)
|
External Debt
Outstanding
|
Of Which (in per cent)
|
|
(US $ million)
|
External Assistance
|
NRD
|
ECB
|
1970-71
|
10,417
|
89.7
|
-
|
10.3
|
1980-81
|
22,616
|
72.8
|
5.9
|
19.9
|
1990-91
|
83,801
|
41.8
|
12.1
|
12.2
|
1995-00
|
93,730
|
51.0
|
11.7
|
14.8
|
2000-01
|
101,326
|
46.5
|
16.4
|
24.1
|
2005-06
|
125,181
|
38.6
|
28.1
|
20.4
|
As per cent to GDP
|
1970-71
|
17.2
|
15.5
|
-
|
1.8
|
1980-81
|
12.4
|
9.1
|
0.7
|
2.5
|
1990-91
|
26.4
|
11.1
|
3.2
|
3.2
|
1995-00
|
26.4
|
13.5
|
3.1
|
3.9
|
2000-01
|
22.0
|
10.2
|
3.6
|
5.3
|
2005-06
|
15.7
|
6.1
|
4.4
|
3.2
|
Note: The data for 1970-71 and 1980-81 are
based on the old definition.
|
Table 5 :India's External Debt Indicators
Year
|
Debt Service Ratio
|
Short Term Debt/Total Debt
|
1970-71
|
34.5
|
-
|
1980-81
|
9.7
|
-
|
1990-91
|
35.3
|
10.2
|
1995-00
|
26.2
|
5.4
|
2000-01
|
16.6
|
3.6
|
2005-06
|
10.2
|
7.0
|
Note: Data for 1970-71 and 1980-81 are based
on old definition.
|
Table 6: Movements of
Indian Rupee 1993-94 to 2005-06
|
Year
|
Range (Rupees per US $)
|
Coefficient of Variation (%)
|
1993-94
|
31.21-31.49
|
0.1
|
1994-95
|
31.37-31.97
|
0.3
|
1995-96
|
31.37-37.95
|
5.8
|
1996-97
|
34.14-35.96
|
1.3
|
1997-98
|
35.70-40.36
|
4.2
|
1998-99
|
39.48-43.42
|
2.1
|
1999-00
|
42.44-44.79
|
0.7
|
2000-01
|
43.61-46.89
|
2.3
|
2001-02
|
46.56-48.85
|
1.4
|
2002-03
|
47.51-49.06
|
0.9
|
2003-04
|
43.45-47.46
|
1.6
|
2004-05
|
43.36-46.46
|
2.3
|
2005-06
|
43.30-46.33
|
1.5
|
2006-07 (April-Nov)
|
44.44-46.97
|
1.1
|
Table 7: Adjusted Measure
of Current Account Balance
(Average for the Plan Period)
|
(Per cent to GDP)
|
Plan Period |
Trade Deficit |
Current Account Deficit |
|
|
Actual |
Adjusted for Private
Transfers (Remittances)
|
First (1951-56) |
-1.0
|
-0.1
|
-0.6
|
Second (1956-61) |
-3.1
|
-2.3
|
-2.7
|
Third (1961-66) |
-2.1
|
-1.8
|
-2.0
|
Annual (1966-69) |
-2.1
|
-2.0
|
-2.2
|
Fourth (1969-74) |
-0.7
|
-0.3
|
-0.5
|
Fifth (1974-79) |
-1.2
|
+0.1
|
-0.7
|
Annual (1979-80) |
-2.8
|
-0.4
|
-1.9
|
Sixth (1980-85) |
-3.5
|
-1.5
|
-2.8
|
Seventh (1985-90) |
-3.0
|
-2.2
|
-3.1
|
Annual (1990-92) |
-2.0
|
-1.7
|
-2.7
|
Eighth (1992-97) |
-2.7
|
-1.2
|
-3.5
|
Ninth (1997-02) |
-3.2
|
-0.6
|
-3.4
|
Tenth (2002-07)* |
-3.9
|
0.5
|
-2.8
|
2002-03 |
-2.1
|
1.3
|
-2.1
|
2003-04 |
-2.3
|
2.3
|
-1.4
|
2004-05 |
-4.9
|
-0.4
|
-3.4
|
2005-06 |
-6.5
|
-1.3
|
-4.4
|
*: Pertains to first four years of the Plan. |
The First Diamond Jubilee Lecture delivered by Dr. Y. V. Reddy, Governor, Reserve Bank of India at the Inauguration of the Diamond Jubilee Celebrations of the Department of Commerce, Osmania University, Hyderabad on December 16, 2006.
|