Alternate paths to economic development:a comparative analysis of Brazil and India in the era of neoliberalism

Abstract

This paper compares and contrasts Brazilian and Indian strategies of development during the era of neo-liberalism from a long period perspective. The Brazilian economy has attempted to combine the goals of redistribution and social equity with the goals of growth and productivity. India on the other hand has pursued a growth maximizing approach to development, while paying little or no attention to the larger goals of human well-being. The article seeks to understand the dynamics of economic change in the two economies and attempts to draw out the institutional and political factors that have influenced these approaches.

Iron ore peripheries in the extractive boom: A comparison between mining conflicts in India and Brazil

“…In India, the iron ore sector was less friendly to international capital. This evidence is consistent with characteristics of Indian neoliberal reforms, whose adoption was less intensive and more gradual than in Brazil (Sirohi, 2017). Here mining sector foreign investments slowly began to increase from 1991, but 100% foreign direct investment was authorized only from 2008 (Vivoda, 2011)-with different minerals being fully opened in separate years.…”

“…Since the 1990s, India and Brazil followed distinct approaches to development since (Amsden, 2001). In Brazil, tariff reductions and exchange rate appreciation stimulated imports of manufactured goods (Sirohi, 2017). Reforms shifted exports to low-value agricultural, mineral and industrial commodities, with these commodities more than tripling exports in tons between 1990 and 2012 (Samaniego et al, 2017).…”

Political Economy of Labour Market Institutions in a Globalised Era

“…It may also be argued that rigid labour market institutions have less to do with strategic interactions of insiders and outsiders and are designed primarily to protect workers from both income shocks and low wages that are associated with "bad" jobs (Agell, 2002). A more stylised political economy argument would posit that the insiders may have much greater ability to organise themselves and bear the cost associated with such organisation relative to the outsiders (Sirohi, 2017). They may also be able to make a much more credible offer to share the rent with the political elite, given that they already earn rent.…”

Elephant limps, but jaguar stumbles: Unpacking the divergence of state capitalism in Brazil and India through theories of capitalist diversity

“…Both have earned this position via a trajectory of import-substituting policies, followed by economic liberalization and policies to attract FDI on the grounds of large domestic markets while retaining public control over its economies and the financial sector in particular. Thus, they occupy an intermediate position among emerging economies between the more liberal Mexico or South Korea and the paradigmatic state-dominated economy of China (Armijo and Echeverri-Gent, 2014;Sirohi, 2017). And despite the strong persistence of class and status inequalities, both Brazil and India are considered as two of the most consolidated democracies among developing and emerging countries (Heller, 2019).…”