,
8 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
My @IndianExpress op-ed on impact of methodological changes on India's GDP growth post 2011-12. Reported annual average growth is about 7%. I estimate it at about 4.5%. 1/n: indianexpress.com/article/opinio…
Confidence interval for my estimates go from 3.5% to 5.5 %. So, post-global financial crisis, growth in India, solid not stellar. Link to research paper: hks.harvard.edu/centers/cid/pu…. 2/n
My paper focuses on original, technical methodological changes which are distinct from more recent GDP controversies such as "back-casting" and puzzling upward revisions for latest years. 3/n
Evidence 1. Growth correlations between 17 simple, macro-ish, & "independently produced" indicators and GDP break down post-2011. Pre-2011, 16 positively correlated with GDP; post-2011, 11 negatively correlated. 4/n 
Evidence 2. Growth of most of these "macro-ish" indicators declines sharply post-2011 compared to pre-2011, but measured GDP growth remained broadly similar. 5/n
Evidence 3. In cross-country regressions, India has normal relationship b/w growth in standard indicators and GDP pre-2011, but post-2011 it is an outlier (growth much greater than predicted by relationship). This finding--normal pre-2011, but outlier post-2011--is robust. 6/n
Evidence 4. Methodological changes affected formal manufacturing sector in particular possibly because of issues related to deflators. Pre-2011, formal manufacturing moved normally with other indicators of manufacturing-index of production, exports-but perversely post-2011. 7/n,
Implications: Macro-economic policy too tight. Impetus for reform possibly dented. Going forward, restoring growth must be highest priority, including to finance govt.’s laudable inclusion agenda. GDP estimation must be re-visited. n/n
