The data flow in recent months suggests that despite considerable tightening of monetary policy by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) over the course of 2010 and 2011, inflation, whilst having declined, has exhibited disquieting stubbornness. India has also been an outlier in relation to most of its comparators in the context of price stability. Evolution of Indian inflation has brought forth several explanations, most with some merit. Among these both monetarist theories and structural explanations have been advanced, as well as internal and external factors. In the former category, a delay or insufficient tightening early in the cycle resulted in generalised inflationary expectations to percolate widely through the economy; in other words, policy makers initially underestimated the risk. In the second category, domestic food price developments catalysed by changes in minimum support prices are drivers. In addition, it has been argued that wage push on account of government funded entitlement schemes in rural areas continues to put upward pressure on prices. Among the external causes, high oil prices since 2008 has been important in policy discourse. Another external variable that has, intermittently, lent itself as a contributor to price pressure at home is high global prices of diverse food cereals.
At its simplest, interest rate changes for controlling inflation works by tempering current investment and consumption by making it more expensive to borrow; in part, growth in aggregate demand is moderated through inducing a change in expected future market interest rates. Usually, the private sector responds to the change in incentives more than the government. Cumulatively, over the cycle, the RBI’s policy rate changes have been prima facie striking, even as the impact on inflation has been gradual and less effective than what policy makers had probably hoped for. The Repo rate was increased in thirteen steps between March 2010 and October 2011 from 4.75 percent to 8.5 percent. Inflation measured by the Wholesale Price Index has remained above the RBI’s comfort zone of 5-5.5 percent for three years now, and persists in the 7-8 percent range. The Consumer Price Index, which analysts claim is important for assessing the trend in inflation expectations has stayed in the range of 9-10 percent since April 2012; that is why the RBI has refrained from further cuts since the fifty basis point reduction in April.
There can be several plausible reasons for the relatively slow price response to an activist monetary policy including, inter alia, a deep fiscal malaise requiring persistent increases in seignorage which is feeding expectations of continuing inflation, “misbehaviour” of monetary policy transmission channels vis-a-vis the real economy, etc. It is noteworthy that seignorage as a ratio to GDP has seen an uptick in India post-2007 compared to immediately prior years in that decade.
There might be an additional explanation. Indians in recent years have benefited from a huge positive boost to their private wealth (and private net worth); this wealth effect originates in the 75 percent increase in global gold prices between October 2009 (roughly US$ 1,000/ounce) and October 2012 (about US$ 1,750/ounce); in Rupee terms the increase is more. Even while keeping aside the rise in volume (that is, inflow) of gold imports in recent years, India’s widely held private stock of gold is disproportionately large; a quick data scan reveals estimates of the stock ranging from a low of 13,000 tonnes to as high as 40,000 tonnes (the latter is probably an exaggeration). As an example, assume that the private stock of gold in India was 17,000 tonnes in 2009; the value of this in October 2012 would work out to about US$ 960 billion (over 50 percent of gross domestic product) compared to around US$ 550 billion three years earlier. The time frame is illustrative, and some other snapshot can be used.
There is little doubt that India is sui generis when it comes to the importance of gold in its citizens’ portfolio of savings instruments and stock of wealth. While gold is not the only global commodity whose price has increased appreciably, gold has characteristics that are distinctive. Households rarely hoard other commodities to pass them from one generation to the next; the exception would be oil owned by Saudi princes. Long after the “Gold Standard” become history, gold held by central banks, national treasuries and multilateral institutions is still counted as a foreign asset in official balance sheets. Physical gold as store of value and as a “guarantee to redeem promises” puts it in a class of its own among physical assets.
While the real value of most financial assets held by Indians has declined (in line with developments elsewhere), house prices have somewhat moderated and business investment has stalled against the background of poor governance, the boost in the value of the stock of gold may have engendered wealth effects that propped up household consumption (at least to some extent) even as policy has increased interest rates across the board. It is not unreasonable that enhanced feeling of well being due to higher wealth can induce a consumer to spend a higher amount from her recurring “normal” income. Of course, it is not that policy induced interest rate hikes have been ineffective for price and real economy developments; the argument is that a coincidental, essentially external, dynamic may have helped to partially offset the effects of monetary tightening. Asset prices have been known to unravel – especially instances when the run up is of the “bubble” variety rather than fundamentals driven, which may be more enduring. Therefore, households’ perception of the permanence or temporariness of the gold price increase (and their increase in wealth) is critical for determining the extent to which their consumption has been impacted on account of this channel.
In conclusion, if gold prices stay elevated or increase going forward, and wealth effects emanating from this externally generated feature are quantitatively important, than monetary policy has that much more work to do to tame inflation.
A Brookings report using NSSO data has shown that 15 per cent of Indians now have some form of health insurance compared to 1 per cent in 2004. Also, while nearly 62 per cent in Andhra Pradesh are covered, less than 5 per cent of people in UP have health insurance.