风萧萧_Frank
以文会友
《龟速的转变：印度未来的挑战与希望》
The Turn of the Tortoise book review – Understand India: Peel an onion
T.N. Ninan
TN Ninan 从《商业标准》董事长兼董事职位退休 T.N. Ninan
T.N. Ninan 是《商业标准》有限公司的董事长。在执掌多家出版物的二十五年间，他曾担任《商业标准》（自1996年起，他也是该杂志的出版人）、《经济时报》和《商业世界》的主编。他还曾担任《今日印度》的执行主编。
自2010年1月起，他开始担任非执行职务。他曾任印度编辑协会主席、印度工业联合会（CII）媒体委员会主席、环境传播协会（出版《脚踏实地》杂志）主席以及贸易委员会委员。
他曾任Shri Ram学校董事会成员、印度-德国咨询小组成员以及阿斯彭研究所印度分所理事。他荣获多项奖项，包括B.D. Goenka新闻杰出成就奖。贾瓦哈拉尔·尼赫鲁纪念基金会授予他2013年和2014年的尼赫鲁奖学金。他于1972年获得马德拉斯大学经济学硕士学位。
《龟速的转变：印度未来的挑战与希望》
作者：T·N·尼南，作家兼记者。 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turn_of_the_Tortoise
本书分析了印度的经济、政治趋势、中印关系、中产阶级规模以及平民党等问题。
在《印度斯坦时报》上，Gaurav Choudhury 评价本书“富有洞察力”，并称其“提供了一个有用的分析框架，有助于理解影响印度经济、政治和社会的多种变量”。[2]经济学家兼作家苏吉特·巴拉博士[3]在《金融快报》上也称赞该书“资料翔实、研究透彻、文笔流畅”。
《乌龟的转弯》书评——了解印度：剥洋葱
https://www.financialexpress.com/jobs-career/the-turn-of-the-tortoise-book-review-understand-india-peel-an-onion/156400/
尼南很好地揭示了过去65年来印度政策的愚蠢之处，但其背后的“原因”值得深入探究。
苏吉特·巴拉 2015年10月25日
尼南·尼南的著作《乌龟的转弯》是一本资料翔实、研究透彻、文笔流畅的著作。十多年来，他以富有洞察力和发人深省的专栏《周末沉思》为世人带来愉悦和启迪，人们对他抱有很高的期望。
这本书的封底写道：“人们说印度是未来的国家——而且将一直如此。” 我对印度的描述与此并无太大不同，那就是“许多人因为押注印度会做正确的事情而被埋葬在地下六英尺深的地方”。印度的故事与让选民和政客们心烦意乱的洋葱故事并无太大不同。剥开一个洋葱皮，你会流泪。当你再剥一层皮，你就会接近核心——你会再次流泪。尼南非常出色地揭示了过去65年来印度政策的愚蠢之处。我几乎同意他所记录和阐述的所有内容。但如果两位经济学家（坦白说：他是一位非常好的朋友）的观点完全一致，那将是极其无聊的。
2004-2014年间，对索尼娅·甘地意识形态的讨论（以及曼莫汉·辛格经济意识形态的缺失）有助于解释，在印度遭受破坏的过程中，洋葱是如何不断生长的——如今，通货膨胀率极高，腐败现象更是猖獗。
本书探讨了前环境部长贾拉姆·拉梅什（Jairam Ramesh）阻止项目实施的记录，并暗示他一视同仁地针对国大党和人民党政客及其不环保的项目。真的吗？如果能提供更多这方面的资料，将会非常有用，信息量也很大。但书中得到的只是国大党议员纳文·金达尔（Naveen Jindal）的项目未获批准。
“意识形态”这个词在书中并不常见，但它应该出现。例如，尼赫鲁的教育政策究竟是建设卓越的殿堂，而不是广泛普及教育，其背后究竟有何深意？大多数发展中国家（当然也包括所有成功的国家）首先强调的是小学和中学教育，然后才转向极少数精英认为有益的免费大学教育。
或者以农业为例——这是唯一一个未受经济改革影响的行业。事实上，就像洋葱一样，每一届继任政府都只会让情况变得更糟，索尼娅·甘地的错误政策更是雪上加霜，她通过大幅提高粮食采购价格来收买农村选票，最终获得了273个席位。2006年至2013年的八年间，印度的平均通货膨胀率为8.6%，而此前八年的平均通货膨胀率为5.2%。如果尼南的书能详细探讨这项政策的政治经济学及其愚蠢之处，内容会更加丰富。索尼娅·甘地和她的顾问们究竟是怎么想的？他们是否曾预料到，最终他们获得的不是273个席位，而是44个？如果没有索尼娅·甘地的领导，乌龟的命运会不会来得更快？
尼南在书末（第289页）正确地指出：“一个基本但未被充分重视的问题，仍然是不愿让市场力量以竞争的方式决定价格”。世界上有70多亿人口，印度有10多亿。我们每个人身上都流淌着红色血液；但为什么在过去68年的大部分时间里，印度政策制定者的血管里流淌着被污染的蓝色血液？尼南应该在备受期待的续集中解答这个问题。
苏尔吉特·S·巴拉是《印度快报》特约编辑，也是总部位于纽约的政策咨询机构“观察组”的高级印度分析师。
《乌龟转向》评论：印度如何迷失方向
https://www.hindustantimes.com/books/the-turn-of-tortoise-review-how-india-lost-its-way/story-p549p2PXIQ0anZmTFx7OSP.html
《印度斯坦时报》|作者：Gaurav Choudhury，新德里
2015年10月31日
在《乌龟的转变》一书中，TN Ninan 阐释了影响该国经济、政治和社会的变量。
说印度独立后的经济史丰富多彩，这绝不是夸大其词。美国官方文件中有一些引人入胜的见解，他们认为韩国是一个“烂摊子”，而印度独立时期的经济体正处于“起飞”的边缘。
我的天哪！NDTV 总编辑 Sreenivasan Jain、《商业标准报》TN Ninan 主席以及前联邦部长 Arun Shourie 出席了 Ninan 新书《乌龟的转变》的发布会。舒里在活动中评论说，用“国大党加一头牛”来形容现任政府的政策，此言一出，引发了热议。（企鹅出版社）
显然，人们对印度经济潜力寄予厚望，不仅来自印度内部，也来自世界。除其他因素外，这种乐观的假设基于两个无形的基本前提：印度早期拥有非常开明的领导层；其次，对民主的坚定承诺。
1947年是印度实现突破的一年，这不仅因为印度成为了一个自由国家，还因为印度国内经济实现了更上一层楼。印度的国内生产总值（GDP）增长率从每年约1-1.5%上升到3-3.5%。在当前形势下，这种扩张速度的飞跃或许并不引人注目，但它确实表明，除了内在的政治优势之外，独立也促进了某种程度的经济复苏。
然而，随着失望情绪的涌现，这种兴奋感迅速消退。印度的经济增长率非但没有像许多人预期的那样腾飞，直到20世纪70年代中期才开始下降——考虑到独立时的希望，这简直是令人沮丧的成绩。印度为何以及如何迷失了方向？
讽刺的是，强制实行制衡的民主结构往往阻碍了经济扩张的野心和潜力。正如杰出记者、《商业标准报》前编辑在《乌龟的转弯》一书中所说：“如果要同时追求多个目标，就必须做出妥协。”
针对主要目标所做的努力……结果是，所有目标均未令人满意地实现。”
在中国，摇摇欲坠的政策可以迅速调整，使其与既定目标保持一致。但印度的情况并非如此。由于缺乏两党政治支持，许多关键的政策改革陷入了看似无休止的争论之中。商品及服务税（GST）就是一个例子。印度两大主要政党——印度人民党（BJP）和国大党——都一致认为有必要构建一个全国统一市场，消除各邦之间的财政壁垒，并用单一税制取代繁杂的累退性地方税。然而，双方都试图阻止对方在议会获得通过。印度民主结构固有的特殊性——立法、行政和司法三权分立——也可能减慢决策速度。
其结果是，印度成了地球上最后一个主要的贫穷国家，“一只加拉帕戈斯群岛大小的乌龟，被快速增长的亚洲和其他地区中大多数规模较小、发展速度更快的国家甩在了后面”。印度如今是世界上增长最快的主要经济体，同时也是最贫穷的大型经济体，在占世界GDP 90%的40个大型经济体中，人均收入最低。
自1991年印度推行改革以来，近四分之一个世纪以来，印度的营商环境依然艰难。从能源短缺和土地问题，到模糊的税法和繁琐的劳动法规，一系列障碍阻碍了大规模投资进入印度，而印度本应是最具吸引力的市场之一。
正如尼南指出的，自1991年以来，历届政府都试图改革印度复杂的要素市场。第二代改革（有时被笼统地称为第二代改革）与1991年那套主要集中在产品市场的主导性政策体系截然不同。
当时，政府更容易放弃四十多年来建立的、教科书式的幼稚产业保护政策，寄希望于本土企业最终能够成熟，能够与全球企业并肩作战。同行。
最终，对本土生产商的产能限制被取消，关税降低，航空和电信等服务型行业向私人开放。竞争提高了标准，降低了关税，为消费者提供了更广泛的选择，带来了更多的投资，并使公共垄断企业受到市场纪律的严酷考验。
然而，这还只是比较容易的部分。正如尼南指出的，几乎没有改革的是四个要素市场：土地、劳动力、资本和企业家精神。在过去的18个月里，全世界一直好奇地注视着印度政策实验室里酝酿的种种，寻找纳伦德拉·莫迪领导的政府（该政府以压倒性优势赢得大选，承诺将迎来好日子）计划如何加快复杂要素市场的改革。
去年，在印度顶级亿万富翁的欢呼声中，标志性的“印度制造”运动启动，誓言要将印度打造成制造业强国。普遍的观点是，大型跨国公司正在寻求替代印度这个亚洲巨头的途径。随着印度成本的上升，一些企业将倾向于迁往印度。这一论点仍有待实证检验。正如尼南所警告的那样，“大多数寻求中国替代品的生产商并没有将目光投向印度……几乎所有东亚国家都提供了更宽松的工作环境”。
尼南对三大潜在趋势的分析颇具洞察力。首先，印度正处于“规模”爆炸式增长的边缘。如果经济以年均7%的速度增长，各种商品和服务的市场都将呈现爆炸式增长。其次，是时候认识到政府正在悄然退出。目前已有43%的学童就读于公立学校。这并不是一个令人欣喜的数据，因为它反映了政府的失败。第三，经济权力的主体正在悄然从新德里转移到各邦首府。对于政策制定者、专业经济学家以及非专业人士来说，尼南的著作提供了一个实用的分析框架，帮助他们理解影响印度经济、政治和社会的多重变量。
《转折点》乌龟
TN·尼南
企鹅出版社
乌龟：印度未来的挑战与希望
T.N. 尼南
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27069021-the-turn-of-the-tortoise
人们常说印度是未来的国家，而且未来仍将如此。
在《乌龟的转折》一书中，杰出的记者 T.N. 尼南以他独有的方式探讨了一系列当代问题——探讨了经济失去动力的原因、政治领域的新兴趋势、中国对印度的影响以及国家与公民之间的关系。他探讨了制造业能否成为一个成功的典范、新中产阶级的规模有多大、
谁才是真正的平民？现在是否有可能终结极端贫困？最后，究竟是什么让我们夜不能寐？
这本内容广泛的著作试图通过数据和分析，了解印度的现状、它为何会发展成如今的样子，以及未来十年可能的发展方向。对于任何对印度及其未来感兴趣的人来说，这都是一本必读且富有启发性的书籍。
其他国家/地区的热门评论
https://www.amazon.ca/Turn-Tortoise-T-N-Ninan/dp/0143427644
2024年1月2日在美国评论
作者经常得出结论，当政客和官僚们的行为损害了印度经济和整个社会时，他们肯定是缺乏见识的。他认为，正是因为自由市场的概念对印度精英阶层来说如此陌生，所以自由市场才在印度不存在。他或许可以考虑读读贝茨的巨著《热带非洲的市场与国家》。自古以来，精英们乐于缩小蛋糕的总体规模，只要这意味着他们自己的份额能更大。作者常常将知识匮乏视为根本原因，而实际上问题在于缺乏动员国家和社会为共同目标奋斗的能力。
鉴于印度中央集权的历史并不长，印度的“功课”是如何实现工业化的。印度河流域文明以其极其复杂的水资源管理系统而闻名，但却没有留下多少复杂的政府结构的痕迹。印度繁荣的关键或许在于弄清楚他们是如何在一个软弱的国家里完成工作的。以“按购买力平价计算，印度是第三大经济体”（在这种语境下，购买力平价毫无意义）这种不顾一切的自我吹嘘，对印度没有任何帮助。
2015年10月16日印度评论
对于任何有兴趣了解印度经济现状以及我们当前政策关注点未来影响的人来说，这都是必读之作。本书以资深记者的热情和活力撰写，充分展现了他对所讨论内容的理解，并辅以充分的引文和比较分析。对于那些谴责国家发展状况以及过度沙文主义的人来说，这本书将令人大开眼界。重要的是，作者对经济问题的深刻见解超越了单纯的数据处理和分析。
2015 年 11 月 22 日，印度评论
我曾是尼南在《商业标准报》专栏的忠实读者，所以一直热切地期待着尼南的新书。
这本书的前两章略显拖沓，但尼南开始独立思考，记录了印度的经济困境，以及印度何时何地出现了问题，以及问题的原因。尼南直言不讳地评价了印度这样一个多元化国家的经济状况，而印度的经济状况至今仍在艰难前行。
这本书真实地反映了印度的经济问题及其迄今为止，尤其是过去十年的发展历程。一如既往，尼南对印度经济的评价是公正诚实的，不带有任何政治立场。此外，这本书还将帮助读者对印度经济形成一个平衡的看法，这与政客们指责对手应对印度经济出现的所有问题的看法相反。
Writer T.N. Ninan
T.N. Ninan
T.N. Ninan is the Chairman of Business Standard Ltd. During a quarter century at the helm of different publications, he has been the editor of Business Standard (where he was also the publisher from 1996), the Economic Times, and Business World. He was also the executive editor at India Today.
From January 2010, he moved into non-executive roles. He has been President of the Editors Guild of India, Chairman of the Media Committee of the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), Chairman of the Society for Environmental Communication (which publishes ‘Down to Earth’ magazine), and a member of the Board of Trade.
He has served on the Board of the Shri Ram School, and is a member of the Indo-German Consultative Group as well as a Trustee of Aspen Institute India. He is a recipient of many awards including the B.D. Goenka award for excellence in journalism. The Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund awarded him a Nehru Fellowship for 2013 and 2014. He has received his M.A. in economics from the University of Madras in 1972.
The Turn of the Tortoise: The Challenge and Promise of India's Future
by T N Ninan, a writer and journalist. 2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Turn_of_the_Tortoise
The book analyses the economy of India, trends in politics, China-India relations, the size of the middle class and the Aam Aadmi Party amongst other issues.
In the Hindustan Times Gaurav Choudhury describes the book as "insightful" and a "useful analytical framework to understand the multiple variables that influence India's economy, polity and society".[2] Economist and author Dr Surjit Bhalla[3] in The Financial Express also praised the book as a "well-documented, thoroughly-researched and extremely well-written book"
The Turn of the Tortoise book review – Understand India: Peel an onion
Ninan illustrates the follies of Indian policy for the past 65 years well, but the "why" behind it calls for a deeper exploration
TN NINAN’S book, The Turn of the Tortoise, is a well-documented, thoroughly-researched and extremely well-written book. One would not have expected less from him, given how he has entertained, and informed us all with his insightful and thought-provoking column, Weekend Ruminations, for more than a decade.
The back cover of the book states: “It is said of India that it is the country of the future— and will remain so”. My version of the description of India, one not very different, is that “many a man has been found six feet under because he bet on India doing the right thing”. The story of India is not much different than what sends voters and politicians into a tizzy—the onion. As you peel an onion, you cry. And as you turn another peel, you are getting closer to the core—and you cry some more. What Ninan does very well is to illustrate the folly, and follies, of Indian policy for the past 65 years. I agree with almost all that he documents and illustrates. But it would be a supreme bore if two economists (full disclosure: he is a very good friend) were to just agree with each other.
So I will venture out and illustrate what I missed in Ninan’s book, and perhaps what would justify a sequel!
The canvas that Ninan has chosen is very large. There is not a single important issue that is absent. Poverty reduction, industrial policy, climate control, economic growth, the middle class, crony capitalism… The list is long; the coverage comprehensive. So what is left for the sequel? A deeper coverage of the WHY.
In my opinion, the ideology of our political leaders is at the core of India’s disappointing performance. Let us not congratulate ourselves for having grown successfully and grown fast—average GDP growth rate higher than 6% for the last 35 years! However, taking solace from a higher growth rate is like the US (or Germany) congratulating themselves that they are growing faster than Greece. What matters is the distance between performance and potential—and there has been a yawning gap (six feet?)—which, hopefully, will not be a hallmark of the future.
What I missed the most: a detailed discussion of ideology and the related political economy. For example, what was (and continues to be) the ideology of the Nehru-Gandhi family, is continuing, and reaffirmed by Sonia Gandhi. Why was the ideology of two other non-dynasty Congressmen—Narasimha Rao and Manmohan Singh—so different?
It would have been useful to demarcate how these two were different, and possibly why the Congress party, and India, broke free from the ideology stranglehold of the dynasty. Perhaps some discussion of the ideology of Sonia Gandhi (and the absence of the economic ideology of Manmohan Singh) during 2004-14 would help explain how the onion continued to grow in the destruction of India—now with the addition of very high inflation and even higher corruption.
Ideology is a word that does not occur often in the book, but it should. For example, what was the thinking behind Nehru’s education policy of building temples of excellence rather than spreading education far and wide? Most developing countries (and certainly all the successful ones) first emphasised primary and secondary education before proceeding towards what a tiny elite found beneficial—free university education.
Or take agriculture—the only sector untouched by economic reforms. Indeed, like the onion, each succeeding government only made things worse, with Sonia Gandhi scaling the depths with her misguided policy of obtaining 273 seats via the buying of the rural vote with large increases in food procurement prices. For the eight years between 2006 and 2013, inflation in India averaged 8.6% after averaging 5.2% for the previous eight years. Ninan’s book would have been richer if the political economy, and folly, of this policy was discussed in some detail. What could possibly have been the thinking of Sonia Gandhi and her advisers? Did they ever envision that instead of 273 seats they would end up getting only 44? Would the turn of the tortoise have come sooner if the leadership of Sonia Gandhi was absent?
Ninan correctly observes near the end (p.289) that “a basic, underappreciated problem remains the unwillingness to let market forces determine prices in competitive fashion”. There are more than 7 billion people in the world, and more than a billion in India. Red blood flows through us all; but why did contaminated blue blood run in the veins of Indian policy makers for the overwhelming part of the past 68 years? That is the question that Ninan should address in a much-awaited sequel.
Surjit S Bhalla is Contributing Editor, Indian Express, and Senior India Analyst, The Observatory Group, a New York-based policy advisory group
The Turn of Tortoise review: How India lost its way
Hindustan Times | By Gaurav Choudhury, New Delhi
Oct 31, 2015
In The Turn Of The Tortoise, TN Ninan explains the variables that influence the country’s economy, polity and society.
To say that India’s post-independent economic history has been a varied experience would be an understatement. There are some fascinating insights in official documents of the United States, where they had considered South Korea as a “basket” case and had identified India as an economy that was on the verge of “take off” during the time of India’s independence.
HOLY COW! NDTV’s managing editor Sreenivasan Jain, chairman of Business Standard TN Ninan and former union minister Arun Shourie at the launch of Ninan’s book, The Turn Of The Tortoise. Shourie stirred debate by commenting at the event that the way to characterise the policies of the present government is “Congress plus a cow”.(Penguin)
Clearly, there appeared to be a lot of hope about the Indian economy’s potential, not just from within, but also from across the world. Among other factors, this optimistic hypothesis was predicated upon two intangible basic premises: India had a very enlightened early leadership and two, deep commitment to democracy.
1947 was a break-out year, not just because India became a free nation, but also because the domestic economy moved into a higher flight. From about 1-1.5% a year, India’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth moved to the 3-3.5% range. Unremarkable as it may appear in the current context, this jump in the rapidity of expansion, does indicate that apart from the innate political goodness, Independence also aided an economic turnaround of sorts.
This excitement, however, fast tapered off as disappointments set in. As opposed to taking off as many had anticipated, India’s growth rate remained stuck at the 3-3.5% range till the mid-1970s — a listless feat given the hopefulness at the time of independence. Why and how did India lose its way?
Ironically, the democratic structure that enforces checks and balances often militated against the economy’s expansionist ambition and potential. As distinguished journalist and former editor of Business Standard, says in The Turn of The Tortoise, “if multiple objectives are to be pursued simultaneously, compromises have to be made on the main objective…the result has been that none of the objectives was achieved to any degree of satisfaction.”
In China faltering policies can be quickly adjusted to bring them in line with the stated goals. That’s not quite the case with India, where the absence of bi-partisan political support has resulted in many critical policy reforms remaining jammed in seemingly endless debates. The goods and services tax (GST) is a case in point. Both the major political parties — the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Congress — agree on the need to stitch a common national market, dismantle fiscal barriers among states and replace a welter of regressive local levies with a single tax. Yet, each party tries to stop the other from getting is passed in Parliament. The inherent peculiarities in India’s democratic structure — the separation of powers between legislature, executive and judiciary — can also decelerate decision-making.
The result is that India is the last major poor country on earth, “the Galapagos-size tortoise that has been left behind by mostly smaller, speedier countries of Rapid Growth Asia and other regions.” India is today the world’s fastest growing major economy and, also the poorest large economy, with lowest per capita income among the 40 large economies accounting for 90% of the world GDP.
Nearly a quarter of a century after India introduced reforms in 1991, it still remains a difficult place to do business in. From energy shortages and land problems to vague tax laws and multiple labour regulations, a raft of obstacles have kept large-scale investments from coming to India, which should have been counted among the most attractive markets.
As Ninan points out since 1991, successive governments have attempted to reform India’s complex factor markets. The second generation reforms, as these are sometimes broadly clubbed as, are distinct from the overriding policy matrix of 1991, which primarily concentrated on product markets.
It was relatively easier to turn the clock back on the text-book infant industry protection that the state had created for more than four decades, hoping that the local businesses would eventually mature capable of standing shoulder-to-shoulder with global peers.
Eventually, capacity curbs on local producers were lifted, tariffs were brought down and the service-oriented sectors such as aviation and telecommunication were opened for private participation. Competition raised standards, brought down tariffs, offered consumers a wider choices, fetched greater investment and subjected public monopolies to the ruthlessness of market discipline.
This, however, was the easier part. What mostly went unreformed, as Ninan points out, were four factor markets: land, labour, capital and entrepreneurship. Over the last 18 months the world has been peering curiously at the stuff bubbling in India’s policy laboratory, looking for signs on how the Narendra Modi-led government, which won a landslide poll promising to usher in good days, plans to hasten reforms in complex factor markets.
The signature “Make in India” campaign, launched last year cheered by the country’s top billionaires, vows to turn India into a manufacturing powerhouse.The prevailing strand of thought is that big transnational corporations, seeking an alternative to the Asian giant as costs there rise, will be tempted to move to India. This thesis remains to be tested empirically. As Ninan warns “most producers looking for alternatives to China are not looking at India…almost all countries in East Asia offer easier working environments”.
Ninan’s analysis about three underlying mega trends are insightful. First, India is on the verge of a “scale” explosion. If the economy grows at an annual average of seven per cent, the markets for all manner of goods and services will explode. Second, it is about time to recognise the quiet, withdrawal of the state. Already 43% of schoolchildren go to public schools. This isn’t quite a flattering statistic as it mirrors the state’s failure. Third, the mass of economic power is quietly shifting from New Delhi to the state capitals. For policy makers, professional economists and the non-initiated, Ninan’s volume offers a useful analytical framework to understand the multiple variables that influence India’s economy, polity and society.
The Turn Of The Tortoise
TN Ninan
Penguin
Tortoise: The Challenge and Promise of India's Future
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/27069021-the-turn-of-the-tortoise
In The Turn of the Tortoise, the distinguished journalist T.N. Ninan addresses a range of contemporary questions as only he can—looking at why the economy lost steam, the emerging trends in politics, the Chinese shadow over India, and the relationship between the state and the citizen. He asks whether manufacturing can be made a success story, what is the size of the neo-middle class, who really is the aam aadmi, and if it is possible to put an end to extreme poverty now. And, finally—what are the fears that should keep us awake at night?
This wide-ranging book is an attempt to understand, through data and analyses, where India stands today, why it has emerged the way it has, and what the next ten years might bring. For anyone interested in India and its future, this is essential and enlightening reading.
Top reviews from other countries
https://www.amazon.ca/Turn-Tortoise-T-N-Ninan/dp/0143427644?
Reviewed in the United States on January 2, 2024
