India needs skill to solve the 'Bangalore bug'
The market for skilled labour is scorching hot in India. A Mc???-Kinsey report indicates that wages for project managers have risen by a compound annual growth rate of 23 per cent since 2000 (albeit from a low level). These are indeed the wages of success. But should India worry?
Rising wages reflect, in no small measure, productivity increases as Indian manufacturing and services become globally competitive. Short-term concerns about inflation are thus mitigated. But the wage increases also reflect India's unique pattern of development, which has created a relative scarcity of skilled labour. This prompts concerns about the medium term: the rising fortunes of the skilled sector may limit the vitality of industries that employ the unskilled and uneducated. It is a conundrum that one might term the "Bangalore bug", after the country's high-technology centre.
Since the 1980s, a unitary India - centralised politically and uniformly mediocre in economic performance - has given way to multiple Indias with performance more related to the capabilities of individual states. Peninsular India, including states such as Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, has grown rapidly. The hinterland, with states such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, has lagged behind.
The divergence relates not just to growth but to patterns of specialisation. Policy choices emphasising university education over basic education and capital-intensive manufacturing over labour-intensive manufacturing have bequeathed a strange legacy. The fast-growing states are increasingly specialising in skill-based services (information technology, finance and telecommunications) and skill-based manufacturing (petrochemicals and pharmaceuticals).
A big question is how the lagging states, with their large populations and attendant political power, can catch up. India's primary and secondary education system, as well as its labour laws, need serious attention if the benefits of the recent dynamism are to be widely shared. Reforms in these areas, along with improvements in governance and infrastructure, are necessary to attract investment and create jobs.
However, even if all these reforms - on the need for which there is consensus among Indian policy economists, although not politicians - are implemented, there is another concern. Recall Dutch disease, which is about the competitive squeeze exerted on one tradeable sector (manufacturing) as a result of wage increases stemming from the rising fortunes of another (typically oil). The Bangalore bug is the contemporary Indian variant, with skill-based services substituting for oil.
Textile plants need supervisors. Bi???-cycle factories need designers. They both require managers. Yet these are the very people whose wages are being bid up sharply, squeezing the profitability of labour-intensive and tradeable manufacturing, with its wafer-thin profit margins in an era of global ???-competition. Thus, highly productive skill-based development in the fast-growing states, while beneficial for the nation, may indirectly undermine the profitability and growth of labour-intensive manufacturing in the others. Moreover, the rise in skilled wages also leads to an exodus of scarce skilled labour from the states lagging behind to the fast-growing ones.
What is the remedy? The obvious solution is not to impede the growth of the fast movers but to enhance the availability of the resource in scarce supply. The strong growth in particular sectors requires India to continue to foster the supply of skilled labour, even while redressing the past neglect of primary and secondary education.
Fortunately, tertiary education does not require more government resources. Instead, the government needs to remove the barriers that prevent foreigners and locals from starting new institutions, while improving accreditation procedures and disclosure standards. It should not encumber private institutions with onerous conditions and it should allow government-aided institutions to raise resources by charging students a reasonable fee. This means overcoming a number of vested interests.
The irony of the Bangalore bug is that to create opportunities to benefit the poor and the unskilled, India may in fact have to produce more skilled workers.
Raghuram Rajan is the International Monetary Fund's economic counsellor and director of the research department. Arvind Subramanian is chief of the macroeconomic studies division in the research department
治疗“印度病”
印度的熟练工人市场非常火爆。麦肯锡(McKinsey)的一份报告显示，2000年以来，项目经理的工资复合年增长率达23%(尽管基础较低)。这些确实是与成功相称的工资。但印度应该担心吗？
随着印度的制造业和服务业具有了全球竞争力，工资上涨在很大程度上反映了劳动生产率的增长。短期通胀担忧因而有限。但工资的上涨也反映出印度独特的发展模式，这种模式造成了熟练劳动力的相对短缺。这引发了对中期的忧虑：熟练技术行业不断增长，可能会制约另一些产业的活力，这些产业雇佣非熟练的、未受过教育的人。这一难题不妨被称为“班加罗尔病”(Bangalore bug)。
80年代以来，一元的印度已让位于多元的印度。一元时代的印度在政治上中央集权，经济表现普遍乏善可陈；而多元印度的经济表现在更大程度上与各邦的能力相关。印度半岛，包括卡纳塔克、马哈拉施特拉、古吉拉特和泰米尔纳德诸邦，经济发展迅速。内陆地区则落后了，包括北方邦、比哈尔邦、中央邦和拉贾斯坦邦。
差异不仅与增长相关，还与分工模式有关。重视大学教育胜过基础教育，以及强调资本密集型制造业胜过劳动密集型制造业的政策选择，留下了一套奇怪的遗产。迅速增长的各邦日益专攻于熟练技术型服务业(信息技术、金融和电信)和熟练技术型制造业(石化产品和医药品)。
一个大问题是，人口众多因而政治上颇有影响力的落后各邦如何能赶上来呢？假如让国民广泛分享印度近期的经济活力带来的好处，那么印度的中小学教育和劳工法都需要得到认真关注。这些领域的改革，以及政府管理和基础设施的改善，都是吸引投资、创造就业所必需的。
然而，尽管需要这些改革是印度政策经济学家们的共识(虽然还不是政客们的共识)，但即便实施了所有这些改革，也还有另一项担忧。回想一下荷兰病(Dutch disease)吧。荷兰病指的是对一个可贸易产业(制造业)的竞争挤压，其原因是另一产业(通常是石油)财富增长导致的工资增长。班加罗尔病是当代印度的荷兰病变种，只不过是由熟练技术型服务业取代了石油。
纺织厂需要主管，自行车厂需要设计师，它们都需要经理人。但正是这些人的工资被急剧抬高了，挤压了劳动密集和可贸易制造业的盈利能力，而在当今全球竞争的时代，该行业的利润已经非常微薄。
因此，那些经济迅速增长的邦，虽然它们生产力很高的熟练技术型发展对国家有利，但可能间接破坏其它邦内劳动密集型制造业的盈利能力和增长。此外，熟练工人工资的上涨，还会导致稀缺的熟练工人从落后的各邦大批离去，前往迅速增长的各邦。
补救措施是什么呢？显而易见的解决方案，是不要阻止走在前列的各邦的发展，而要增加稀缺资源的供应。特定产业的强劲增长，需要印度继续加强熟练工人的供应，即使是在纠正过去对中小学教育的忽略的同时。
幸运的是，高等教育不需要太多政府资源。相反，政府需要排除阻碍外国人和本国人开设新机构的障碍，同时要改善资格鉴定程序，提高信息披露标准。政府不应以繁琐的条件来妨碍私人机构，而应当允许政府援助的机构向学生收取合理学费，以筹集资源。这意味着要战胜许多既得利益集团。
班加罗尔病的讽刺意味在于，为了创造机会使穷人和没有一技之长的人受益，实际上印度可能不得不培养更多熟练工人。
拉古拉姆?瑞占是国际货币基金组织(IMF)经济顾问兼研究部主管。阿文德?萨勃拉曼尼亚是国际货币基金组织研究部宏观经济研究分部负责人。
