The advent of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals has refocused global attention on the roles of business and other nonstate actors in achieving global goals. Often, business involvement takes the form of collaborations with the more traditional actors-governments and non-governmental organizations. Although such partnerships for development have been seen before, the scale and expectations are new. This paper explores how and why these cross-sector collaborations are evolving, and what steps can or should be taken to ensure that partnerships create public and private value. The arguments are illustrated with reference to cases of market-driven partnerships for agriculture in Southeast Asia that are intended to engage marginalized smallholder farmers in global value chains in agriculture. The aims of these cross-sector collaborations coincide with several targets of the Sustainable Development Goals such as poverty alleviation, decreasing environmental impact, and achieving food security. This is a hard case for mechanisms intended to protect public interests, given that the target beneficiaries (low-income smallholder farmers and the environment) are unable to speak effectively for themselves.We find that structures and processes to align interestsThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

The term 'Modi-nomics' gained widespread publicity across India and resonated internationally during the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) campaign for the 2014 general elections. Named after the BJP's star campaigner and then Prime Ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, Modi-nomics refers to his success as Chief Minister in Gujarat, a state richer, with faster GDP growth, more jobs and industry than most other Indian states. The 2014 campaign promised that the 'Gujarat model' of clean government and economic competence, could be replicated across the country. In our paper we identify the promises and premises behind Modi-nomics. We take stock of claims and criticism, drawing on comparative development statistics to discuss a much lauded but also highly contested 'success' story. To assess whether Modi-nomics is guiding policy we draw upon Douglas North's new institutionalism. In addition, we use a sociological understanding of institutions to argue that a central component of Modi-nomics is to achieve economic change by altering perceptions and images as well as policy. However, Modinomics remains highly contested within India's domestic political arena and has unleashed other political entrepreneurs drawing on politics of entitlement (the Patel agitation) or religious sensibilities (the beef ban controversy). To gain resilience, Modi-nomics will have to combine ideational and institutional change and to reconcile the tensions arising in the process.

No abstract

Financial inclusion is the process of building viable institutions that provide financial services to those hitherto excluded. These may include savings, insurances, remittances, and credit. Microfinance became the most dominant method for achieving financial inclusion. However, different microfinance schools of thought recommend opposite ways for attaining financial integration. India is a particularly insightful case study due to the sheer number of people excluded from formal financial services, as well as the spectrum of actors and approaches. The aim of this article is threefold. First, defining financial inclusion, depicting its status quo in India and comparing it to its South Asian and BRICS peers using recently released data from the Global Findex database. Second, focusing on microfinance as the dominant vehicle for achieving financial inclusion by scrutinizing its definitions, contrasting its two leading "schools of thought" and analyzing the central role of its dominant group-based approach. Third, the article will examine why people opt to take micro-credit at 33 percent interest rates.

No abstract