This week's links include a new study on India's nutrition crisis, economic implications of the ongoing India-China shenanigans, problems that impact investment is most focused on, and the marvel of urban living that is Dharavi. Also something on how plastics are back (who's surprised?), and a piece of history that actually blew my mind.
They’re back!: Not that they ever quite went away, but I hear that single use plastics have made a comeback. Three factors can be seen to be responsible: (1) C-19 driven need and paranoia around hygiene and disposables, (2) active lobbying by manufacturers of plastics and plastic goods, and (3) lower oil prices that have dramatically cut the cost of producing virgin plastic (made from fossil fuels) to well below the cost of utilizing recycled plastic. Delhi, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala have already relaxed restrictions on the use of plastic less than 50 microns.
In 2019, India's Prime Minister had called for an end to using single-use plastics, setting an ambitious target of eliminating these by 2022. See this on why a complete ban is difficult (job losses, impact on supply chain of products like milk and processed food, powerful lobbies). See this (2018) (dated, but comprehensive) piece from Down to Earth on India’s plastic menace, cities that have been the biggest contributors, and the policy trajectory on the issue. Another good piece by the Economist on wider issues here.
In the largest global context, know that India’s per-capita demand for plastics and daily plastic waste generation is at the lower end of the global spectrum. However, its inadequate waste disposal systems make it one of the largest contributors to projected global mismanaged waste produced in 2025. The chart below (from the brilliance that is Our World in Data) captures this. An excellent slide deck of the world’s plastic problem is here.
Making Dharavi Cool: While there are many news reports of Dharavi (Asia’s largest slum) in Mumbai flattening the curve, I recommend this very cool, independent website/ blog run by a group of urbanologists and researchers. There are weekly progress reports (latest here), and survey results from a wide variety of questions - How many residents are planning to go back to their villages? How many have food this week? How many live in dwellings with any ventilation at all? How are Dharavi’s schools coping?.
The website is also a masterclass in presenting research and survey data, building engagement and sharing information. Take a look, at least a peek. It hosts interesting pieces on wider urban issues too – such as this one on what an India-specific model of urbanisation could look like, and this one on why India should reject China's obsession with bigger, denser megacities. On urban issues more generally, a podcast here by the BBC on how Covid-19 will change our cities.
Is India spending enough on nutrition?: The folks at IFPRI and Accountability Initiative have done some exhaustive number crunching to estimate that India should have spent at least INR 38,571 crores (4.14 Billion GBP) on nutrition in 2019-20. Before you ask me how much did India actually spend – the answer is I don’t know. They don’t know either. I called and asked.
What we do know is how much India’s State and Union governments allocated towards programmes that are responsible for this funding – and that is about 44% of the funds needed under the ICDS scheme, and 75% under the main maternity benefit scheme (JSY). ICDS and JSY are the two main expenditure heads under which this money can be spent. See the detailed policy brief here. See the chart below for state-wise variations in the ratio of actual allocation to need for ICDS. (SNP = Supplementary Nutrition programme – the component responsible for nutrition)
On India and China: These pieces caught my eye recently on the economic implications of the ongoing India-China shenanigans. First, see this one on the role of Chinese imports in India’s economy and the sectors most closely linked. India’s trade deficit with China has more than doubled since FY10. So replacing imports overnight will be challenging. Pharma, Automobiles, Consumer Durables, Renewable Energy and Telecom will be most affected as they rely on substantive intermediate input imports from China. Read this on how China has built its clout in India’s neighbourhood through trade and investment – steadily replacing India as the major trading partner of most South Asian countries. Then read this nuanced, thought-provoking piece by Rathin Roy on how the question we need to answer is not whether Chinese imports can be replaced, but how do we change the very composition of Indian demand and shift it away from the elite consumer to mass consumption in agriculture, housing, education, and housing that can be met by raising the economy’s productivity – the boring, old-fashioned way.
On Chinese investment in India, as you read this on how despite all the hype China is actually not a big investor in India; read also this on how official numbers underestimate China’s investment in India. This is because (1) there is no exhaustive list or record of Chinese companies operating in India/ their investments, (2) Chinese investments can be routed through different countries, (3) there are different routes of FDI into India, and complete FDI statistics are not available with a single government agency, (4) China may have more accurate data but is much less forthcoming, and (5) it is difficult to confirm whether stated investments by Chinese companies have materialised to the fullest extent.
Measuring impact: In a first, the United States’ development bank - Development Finance Corporation (DFC) (earlier OPIC) has made its development impact assessment methodology public. Called “Impact Quotient” or IQ, the new framework will enable DFC to assess whether a project should receive funding, to track impact, and to push investee companies to do more. IQ will assess impact within 3 main contexts: economic growth, inclusion, and innovation. Projects will get additional points for being more inclusive to women and fewer if they are damaging to the environment. A blog by Devex here. More detail on DFC's page here, along with a link to submit feedback, if you’re so inclined.
More on Impact Investing, from IFC: See here IFC’s most recent (June 2020) publication on “New Insights into the Practice of Impact Investing”. It includes trends in impact investing, survey results of investor practices, and 32 case stories. The report lists “Operating Principles” of impact investment, signalling what are recognised as best practices. It also presents results from a survey of 50 development finance institutions with insights into questions of which geographies and sectors are of most interest to impact investors. For instance, see the chart below on which SDGs attract most impact investments.
Sorry, WHAT?: Finally, did you know that in 1957 you could go from London to Calcutta (now Kolkata) on a *bus*?
Yup. Tickets cost £85 one way, and £65 for the return journey. It travelled through France, Italy, the then Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Turkey, Iran and Pakistan. Details here – with pictures and everything. It doesn’t seem like a hoax to me but if you know something I don't, I'm all ears!