Indian Politics & Policy Volume 1, Number 2, Fall 2018 | Page 133

Indian Politics & Policy
somewhat monolithic and uniform in
their capacities. In this regard, Sinha’s
analysis, which is discussed in the next
section, offers a contrasting viewpoint.
Importantly, her analysis, backed by
in-depth case studies of the textile and
pharmaceutical sectors, suggests a significant
reconfiguration of the business–state
relationship in the realm of
trade policy after the late 1990s. Her
account, albeit one that is narrower in
scope than Joshi’s book, shows that in
response to certain imperatives of globalization,
the Indian state and private
business came much closer together after
the late 1990s and actively collaborated
and consulted with each other in
formulating a coherent response that
resulted in greater global integration.
Importantly, for Sinha, the Indian state
“facilitated deeper integration than expected
and has been at the forefront of
change in trade policy and economic
institutions as well as markets” (Sinha,
274). According to her, we are witnessing
a “new developmental state”
in India, “one that combines statism
with multiple plural interests” (Sinha,
281). What her book implies for Joshi’s
analysis is that state capacity in India is
very uneven and the state’s willingness
to collaborate with the private sector
may differ along different policy dimensions.
Moreover, both the state and
the private sector in India may be more
fragmented and diverse than Joshi’s
analysis assumes.
In terms of the links between
Indian democracy and its economic
model, Joshi’s book primarily treats the
former as affecting the latter. However,
not surprisingly, economic liberalization
has also had effects on Indian democracy.
In particular, the lack of economic
inclusiveness has contributed to
the development of what Kohli refers
to as a “two-track democracy” where
the poor are primarily consigned to
the electoral sphere while the elite
dominate policymaking. Exclusionary
economic trends have also meant that
electoral mobilization continues to
occur primarily along lines of identity
and other symbolic aspects. As such,
there may be a more complex two-way
link between democracy and economic
performance than the book accounts
for.
The book tends to focus mainly
on technocratic solutions such as cash
transfers or basic income in the context
of inclusion and social protection.
However, welfare measures in many
parts of the world have come about as
the result of contentious, bottom-up
politics placing pressure on states. As
such, an active civil society and social
movements that place pressure on the
state to deliver may be central to trends
of inclusion, not simply a restriction
of the scope of the state’s activities and
transfer of delivery to the private sector
that Joshi focuses on. Finally, while
the case for a radical reform agenda
is compelling, the book is largely silent
about what the catalysts for such
change might be. Joshi very briefly
considers the role of the middle class as
well as that of state governments at the
end of the book, but a more substantial
discussion on these potential catalysts
would be useful.
130