Arvind Subramanian, the man who simplified Economic Survey

One of the most anticipated among all government documents is the Economic Survey, usually tabled in the Parliament a day before the Union budget. Till a few years ago, it was a heavy, drab, figure loaded stuff, which only bureaucrats, economists and planners could actually make sense of. When Arvind Subramanian presented his first Economic Survey as Chief Economic Advisor – not authored by him, as he never failed to impress, but by a team – it became a treat to read, practically for everyone. The Economic Surveys presented by Subramanian reflected the passion of a committed researcher and professor, and they became an extremely engaging read. Gone were the mumbo jumbo stuff, in their place were paragraphs after paragraphs of what people can actually see on the ground, the data behind, and suggestions on how to move forward – not always in sync with what may be politically acceptable.

Subramanian who was an economist at the International Monetary Fund, among his assignments, considers his role as CEA to the government of India as the best, according to Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley. The CEA works in close collaboration with the Finance Minister. Subramanian was the quintessential professor in the government, giving ideas proactively, helping to take them forward, and disapproving without offence. Even at his media conferences, immediately after the tabling of Economic Survey, he had told journalists that he would read every piece they write the next day, and check for accuracy. The Economic Survey was clearly something he enjoyed authoring.

The first one he presented, Economic Survey 2014-15, had to be about the Modi government. It had a blue coloured cover and it was as independent, as it could get. Big bang reforms, as conventionally understood, are an unreasonable and infeasible standard for evaluating the government's reform actions, he wrote, adding that the electoral mandate received by the government affords “a unique window of political opportunity which should not be foregone.” The CEA pointed out that “perspiration and inspiration, investment and efficiency, respectively, determine long-run-growth”. That year, he also endorsed what many others had been saying for long—that only a small fraction of the benefits actually accrue to the poor. Subramanian came up with a suggestion – cash based transfers, what was hitherto called Direct Benefits Transfer by UPA 2. But Subramanian added value to it through what he called the JAM Trinity – merging Jandhan bank account, Aadhaar number and mobile phone.

Economic Survey 2015-16, had a cover in many shades – yellow, green, white, even saffron, with a multicoloured map of India. Subramanian wrote about the “Chakravyuha” challenge in the Indian economy – the Indian economy has moved from ‘socialism with limited entry to “marketism” without exit’. He spelt out the costs of impeded exit and asserted that there could be political costs as well. Subramanian also pointed out that the benefits of impeded exit often flow to the rich and influential in the form of support for “sick” firms, which may generate an impression that the government favours large corporates. Subramanian propounded that there is good reason to make it easy for companies to exit so that resources will be forced or enticed away from inefficient and unsustainable uses. The CEA also touched upon a hitherto untouched area. There was a chapter called “Bounties for the Well-off”, which pointed out the many subsidies that the very well-off were also enjoying. The suggestion unsaid was to bring an end to such “bounties”. It was thereafter that Prime Minister Narendra Modi began asking people to give up subsidies on LPG, and later, senior citizens' concession in railways.

The next one – Economic Survey 2016-17, in deep blue cover came after domonetisation and had a teaser of a headline to the chapter on demonetisation, “To Deify or Demonize?”. Subramanian analysed the short term impact and eventual benefits it would accrue in the long run. Later in the press conference where he discusses the economic survey with the media, predictably, he was asked whether he knew about the implementation of demonetisation before hand. But the CEA declined to answer that one!

However, the most significant chapter in the 2016-17 edition of the Economic Survey was the one on Universal Basic Income. Subramanian not only broached the idea of UBI but it was the first time a government document mentions about it. In a volume that had a lot of Mahatma Gandhi's thoughts thrown in, the CEA referred to “wiping every tear from every eye”, as a conceptually appealing idea, and said that was the hallmark of UBI. He worked out the cost, raised the issue of how to fund the programme, seemed to prefer “de jure universality, de facto quasi universality”, guided the government on how to go about excluding the non-deserving, and mooted gradual universalisation!

The last Economic Survey with CEA Arvind Subramanian's signature will be the pink Economic Survey of 2017-18. The colour, he said, was chosen as a symbol of “support for the growing movement to end violence against women, which spans continents”. The Economic Survey addressed the issue of “deep meta-preference in favour of sons” in Indian society. The chapter ends with the suggestion that just as India has committed itself to move up in the ranks in ease of doing business indicators, it should perhaps do so on gender outcomes as well.