Thursday, November 18, 2010

Development of India’s pharmaceutical industry

Up until the 1970s India’s pharmaceuticals market was mainly supplied by large international corporations. Only cheap bulk drugs were produced domestically by state-owned companies founded in the 1950s and 60s with the help of the World Health Organisation (WHO). These state-run firms provided the foundation for the sector’s growth since the 1970s. Back then, India’s government aimed to reduce the country’s strong dependence on pharmaceutical imports by flexible patent legislation and to create a selfreliant sector. In addition, it introduced high tariffs and limits on imported medicines and demanded that foreign pharmaceutical companies reduce their shares in their Indian subsidiaries to twofifths.

This made India a less attractive location for international companies, many of which left the country as a consequence. Especially India Drugs and Pharmaceutical Ltd. (IDPL) is credited with speeding up the development of a national pharmaceutical industry. Several IDPL staff have successfully founded their own firms, which now belong to the top group among India’s pharmaceutical companies. In the 1980s, however, the decline of state-run companies began − among other things because of increasing central government bureaucracy and insufficient corporate governance. Today, there are no (entirely) state-owned pharmaceutical companies left.

By contrast, the weakening of the patent system and numerous protectionist measures sped up the development of a major national pharmaceutical industry on a private-sector basis, which made it possible to provide the population with a large number of drugs.

Large market share for generic drugs
As there was no efficient patent protection between 1970 and 2005, many Indian drug producers copied expensive original preparations by foreign firms and produced these generics by means of alternative production procedures. This proved more cost-efficient than the expensive development of original preparations as no funds were required for research, which contained the financial risks. This spending block may come to as much as EUR 600 m for only one drug. This kind of money could previously only be raised by large corporations in the industrial countries. The competitiveness of generics producers is based on cost-efficient production. In this field, Indian companies are currently in top position.

At one-fifth, India’s share in the global market for generic drugs is considerably higher than its share in the overall pharmaceuticals market (approx. 2%). At the same time, India’s pharmaceutical companies gained know-how in the manufacture of generic drugs. Hence the name “pharmacy of
the poor” which is frequently applied to India. This is of significance not least for the domestic market as disposable income is as little as EUR 1,900 per year for roughly 140 million of the total of 192 million
Indian households1, which means the majority of Indians cannot afford expensive western preparations.

Current situation
India’s pharmaceutical industry has been in transition for several years now. This is the result mainly of the changes to drug patent legislation in 2005. Prior to the Patent Amendment Bill, not the substance itself but merely the manufacturing process was protected for a period of seven years. India’s patent legislation had frequently been the reason for legal disputes with large western drug firms, especially from the US. In line with international
standards, the sector is now subject to product and process patents valid for a period of 20 years. Indian companies seeking to copy drugs before the patent expires are forced to pay high licence fees.

This became necessary following the signing by India's government of the TRIPS Agreement (Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights). So Indian drug firms could no longer simply copy medicines with foreign patents by using alternative manufacturing processes and offer them on the domestic market.

As a consequence of these major changes to India’s drug patent legislation, the country’s pharmaceutical industry is undergoing a process of re-orientation. Its new focus is increasingly on self developed drugs and contract research and/or production for western drug companies.

Disproportionately high sales growth
Between 1996 and 2006, nominal sales of pharmaceuticals on the Indian subcontinent were up 9% per annum and thus expanded much faster than the global pharmaceutical market as a whole (+7% p.a.). Indian companies strongly expanded their capacities, making the country by and large self-sufficient. Nonetheless, with total
sector sales of roughly EUR 10 bn, India commands a less than 2% share in the world’s pharmaceutical market (1966: 1.5%). This puts the country in twelfth place internationally, even behind Korea, Spain and Ireland and before Brazil, Belgium and Mexico. Among the Asian countries, India’s pharmaceuticals industry ranks fourth at 8%, but has lost market share to China, as sales growth there was nearly twice as high and sales volumes nearly four times higher than in India.

India’s pharmaceutical industry currently comprises about 20,000 licensed companies employing approx. 500,000 staff. Besides many very small firms these also include internationally well-known companies such as Ranbaxy, Cipla or Dr. Reddy’s. With sales of roughly EUR 1 bn, Ranbaxy is currently the world’s seventh largest
generics manufacturer.

Currently the most important segment on the domestic market is anti-infectives; they account for one-quarter of total turnover. Next in line, and accounting for one-tenth each, are cardio-vascular preparations, cold remedies and pain-killers. By contrast, medicines against civilisation diseases (such as diabetes, asthma and obesity)
or so-called lifestyle drugs (anti-depressants, drugs to help smokers to quit and anti-wrinkle formulations) are of little significance at present. All in all, the Indian pharma industry produces about 70,000 different drugs, which is higher than the number produced in Germany (60,000).

How does this compare with China and western industrial countries?
Despite its high turnover growth rates, India cannot match the sales achieved by its two major competitors in ex-Japan Asia, China and Korea. With sales to the tune of EUR 36 bn or four times as much as India’s, China is clearly the leader in the pharmaceuticals market.

Korea, too, outstrips India, with pharma sales amounting to EUR 14 bn. High growth rates are also being registered in the pharmaceuticals markets of Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia. To be sure, sales in these countries are relatively low at EUR 1-7 bn.
Compared with the large industrial countries, India’s pharmaceutical industry is still relatively unimportant – despite its high growth rates. In the US, pharma sales are fourteen times higher, in Japan five times and in Germany four times. The gap with India is even more obvious when comparing per-capita sales. In the western industrial countries, per-capita sales of pharmaceuticals amount to a good EUR 400 per year, this is forty times higher than in India.

Pharmaceuticals one of the export-driven sectors

In 2006, India’s pharma industry exported products worth EUR 3 bn, up from only EUR 650 m in 1996, which was due to the fact that demand for low-cost generic drugs is strongly on the rise, above all in the US, Europe and Japan. At 22%, export growth in 2006 was even twice as high as the global average and in Germany (roughly
11% each). Meanwhile, India’s export ratio has reached 32% – about double the figure registered ten years ago.

For some time now, India has exported more pharmaceutical products than it imports. Over the last ten years, the export surplus has risen from about EUR 370 m to currently just under EUR 2 bn. Slightly over 80% of the drugs are sold to the US and Europe, where India’s companies are benefiting from the population’s purchasing power as well as regulatory changes (greater cost-consciousness).

By contrast, traditional sales markets such as Russia, Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America have lost in importance. However, only 60 production locations of India’s pharma sector have been certified by the World Health Organisation, which implies they comply with the strict quality standards imposed by the US Food and
Drug Administration (FDA). Compliance with FDA standards is the precondition for selling products on the important US market.

Medium-term outlook
High GDP growth rates, rising population numbers and, as a result, a growing middle class are the drivers of India's pharmaceutical market.

Boost from population growth
India’s pharma sector is receiving a major boost from population growth. According to UN estimates, the population total looks set to rise from 1.1 bn at present to 1.4 bn in 2020. Up until 2020 India will see as many children being born as there are people living in Germany, France, the UK and Italy together. By 2025, India will
probably have overtaken China as the world's most populous country. Its population growth results not least from higher life expectancy. This is attributable, among other things, to improved preventive healthcare. Of course, though, average life expectancy in India is still markedly lower than in western countries. While the figure is 64 years for men and 66 years for women in India, life expectancy in Germany is 76 years for men and 82 years for
women.

The ageing of the population in India offers considerable market opportunities. According to a UN estimate, the share of people over the age of 65 in the total population will rise from 5% currently to 8% in 2025. This would mean roughly 55 million more people aged 65 and over than today. As a result, typical age-related illnesses such
as cancer and cardio-vascular diseases will be more wide-spread. The pharmaceutical sector will also receive a boost from the gradual spreading of civilisation diseases such as obesity and diabetes.

According to PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), the number of Indians with diabetes will reach approx. 74 m in 2025 (currently 34 m); this is roughly the population of Turkey today. In the developing countries as a whole, there could be just under 230 m diabetes patients. This development should benefit India’s generics
manufacturers.

Support from rising household incomes
For the next 15 years we expect average annual growth in India of 6-7%.2 Strong income growth will broaden the middle class, an important group for foreign drugs manufacturers, as it has considerably higher incomes at its disposal than average Indians.

Already today, nearly 60 m people in India’s middle class, with disposable incomes of EUR 3,500 to EUR 17,000 p.a., can afford western-produced medicines. Until 2025 their number looks set to rise to approx. 580 m (+12% p.a.), according to McKinsey estimates.

Over a space of ten years, a four-member middle-class family has seen spending on pharmaceuticals grow five times over, to approx. EUR 170 p.a. People’s improved income situation has also led to a growing desire to insure against illness. At this juncture, only 4% of all Indians have health insurance, but this share should rise strongly over the medium term. This will have a positive impact on the demand for drugs as people with health insurance are usually more likely to obtain prescriptions than those without cover. Globalisation has not caused traditional medicine to be abandoned but with higher education, rising income and a change in lifestyle, western medical treatment is gaining in importance. At present the population especially in rural areas still sees western medicine as a stop-gap cure which is unlikely, though, to provide a lasting solution to health problems. Today, about 70% of the population on the Indian subcontinent depend entirely or at least in part on traditional Indian medicine which is cheaper and more easily available than western drugs.

Changes in drug patent law lead to development of “original” drugs. Since 2005 India’s pharma sector has no longer been protected by the country’s lax patent legislation. Hence innovation must come before imitation now. Large manufacturers already began to adjust their business models some time ago and put greater emphasis on
drugs research. On a long-term horizon, they do not want to limit themselves to the production of low-cost generics. Even though a number of companies are well positioned in the generics market, many of them are seeking to turn into research-based firms.

However, they are facing fierce international competition in this segment. So it will take many years for India to become a serious competitor for western pharmaceuticals companies in the field of patent-protected drugs. According to the company’s own information, approx. 40% of turnover at drugs manufacturer Ranbaxy stems from drugs developed in-house, which would still be about one-tenth lower than at similarly large western companies. In order to increase the speed of development and share the financial risk, there are likely to be more strategic alliances between Indian and foreign companies.

India’s leading pharmaceutical companies are currently spending nearly one-tenth of their revenues on research and development. At the large western companies, however, R&D expenditure comes to 20%. Already in 1994, Dr. Reddy’s launched a basic research programme and was followed by Ranbaxy and Wockhardt in 1997. Last
year, as many as twelve companies engaged in research for new pharmaceutical substances. The focus here is on drugs against malaria and AIDS, as demand potential in these segments is particularly high. Malaria is the most common tropical disease, with about 300 m to 500 m new infections per year, according to the WHO. The number of people infected with HIV adds up to about 40 million worldwide.

However, compared with the large international players, the volume of research at Indian pharmaceutical companies – especially basic research – is still very small. Average R&D spending of Indian pharmaceutical companies comes to just under 4% of total turnover, compared with 9% in Germany. However, one must bear in mind the different sizes of the pharmaceutical industries in the two countries.

In this context, Indian companies are likely to benefit from the liberalisation process on the domestic capital market, which began at the start of the 1990s and is not yet completed. The loosening of financial market regulations has until recently led to an increasing presence of foreign investors, with interest focussing mostly on the equity market. Since the beginning of the 1990s, Indian companies may also be listed on foreign stock exchanges.

High level of education benefits pharma sector
The fact that despite the low level of unit labour costs India boasts a highly skilled workforce has enabled the country's pharmaceutical industry at a relatively early stage to offer quality products at competitive prices. Each year, roughly 115,000 chemists graduate from Indian universities with a master’s degree and roughly 12,000
with a PhD.4 The corresponding figures for Germany – just under 3,000 and 1,500, respectively – are considerably lower. After many chemists from India migrated to foreign countries over the last few years, they now consider their chances of employment in India to have improved. As a result, a smaller number is expected to go abroad in the coming years; some may even return.

Competitive advantages over traditional manufacturers Irrespective of the disadvantages in some areas, India's pharmaceutical companies make use of their competitive advantages over traditional drugs manufacturers in western industrial countries. Wage costs in the Indian drugs industry come to only about 30% of the European level or 20% of the US level. Overall drugs manufacturing in India is up to 50% cheaper than in western industrial
countries.

For international pharmaceutical firms, India is attractive as a location for research primarily because of its low development costs. Clinical tests may be conducted more easily and often even yield more precise results. Thanks to higher population numbers, there are considerably more suitable persons to be found who can take
part in tests than in the west. Approval for drugs to go on the market will only be granted if they have passed several tests on humans. In order to achieve this, companies usually need several thousand persons per drug. This means that roughly 100,000 volunteers must be subjected to initial examinations. In many cases, clinical tests by drug manufacturers in the west failed because their test persons had already taken a number of other medicines so the effect of the new drug could not be proven. Moreover, roughly 40 to 70% of all
drug trial persons will fail to complete the test phase. By contrast, 90% of all probands in India complete the tests, not least because they seek to improve their income situation by participating. This could cause a problem if ethical aspects gain in importance; in light of the relatively high financial incentive, participants pay too little
attention to potential side effects.

However, it is not altogether easy for western firms to relocate their clinical tests to emerging markets. In many cases, local hospitals must make large-scale investments and train their staff. Despite these difficulties several large international companies have chosen India as their location for clinical tests. Eli Lilly, the US pharmaceutical company, currently has several projects in India, and Pfizer (US) is carrying out clinical tests for malaria drugs there. The market for contract research in India could reach a volume of nearly EUR 2
bn by 2010, up from EUR 600 m in 2006. All in all, the global market volume for contract research is likely to rise from EUR 8 bn recently to EUR 20 bn by 2020.

So the formerly distant relationship between Indian and international companies is beginning to turn increasingly towards cooperation. A case in point is the Contract Research Agreement between an Indian and a British company, which lays down a limited number of previously agreed steps to develop a new drug in laboratories in
India.

Manufacture for foreign pharmaceutical groups more important Indian companies also see profitable business opportunities in contract production for international pharma groups. There are sufficient production capacities available following the massive expansion of plants for generics manufacture. Already today, Ranbaxy for instance produces drugs for Germany’s Hexal and Ratiopharm. According to an analysis by IBEF (India Brand Equity Foundation), total contract production worldwide has a volume of approx. EUR 25 bn, which looks set to rise further to EUR 40 bn by 2010. Growth is driven mainly by the relocation of production for preparations whose patent protection will expire soon. Building a pharmaceutical plant in India is about 40% cheaper than in Europe
or the US, and manufacturing costs for pharmaceuticals are markedly lower. This cost advantage provides a strong incentive to move production also for western firms.

Given the improvements in patent law and capital protection, the Indian market has become attractive again for western drugs manufacturers. Add to this the relatively low wage costs, employees’ good qualifications and expectations of strong growth in the market. According to the German-Indian Chamber of Commerce, twenty
German drugs companies have already started operations in India. Indian pharmaceutical companies increasing
investment abroad In the coming years, Indian drug makers will likely continue to look to foreign countries to expand their operations. An example for the global orientation of Indian pharmaceutical companies is Ranbaxy.

Currently, Ranbaxy exports its products to 125 countries, has subsidiaries in nearly 50 countries and production plants in more than 10 countries. The US has become its most important sales market. Sales to the US recently amounted to just under 30% of Ranbaxy’s total sales, while sales to Europe came to nearly 20%. Overall, approx. 80% of the manufacturer’s total sales are generated abroad.

According to PwC, about half of all larger Indian drug makers are looking to expand abroad through take-overs, whereas less than 20% of their Chinese competitors pursue that strategy. Targeted markets are still the US and Europe. In many cases, there are institutional obstacles to overcome first. More often than not, Indian medicines fail because doctors and pharmacists in other countries are reluctant to prescribe or hand out drugs produced in India. There is a tendency to favour locally/nationally produced drugs. For this reason, drug companies from India are finding it hard to gain a foothold in western markets.

Over the past few years, for instance, Ranbaxy has bought companies in Romania, Belgium, Italy and France, and intends to become the world’s fifth largest manufacturer of generics by 2012. Wockhardt is operating in Germany and the UK, as is Cadila in France. At the beginning of 2006, Dr. Reddy’s bought Betapharm, a
German generics manufacturer, for almost EUR 500 m.

The German market is particularly attractive for Indian companies as generics prices there are relatively high by international standards. Compared with the UK, a generic drug costs nearly 50% more in Germany. So it cannot come as a surprise that Indian producers are loath to leave the lucrative German market to the large German
generics companies such as Ratiopharm, Hexal and Stada alone. Factors weighing on the pharmaceuticals industry Besides the positive outlook for India’s drugs industry, there are also a number of adverse factors. These include, above all, serious shortcomings in infrastructure.

Compared with western industrial nations, energy prices are low but companies must expect repeated power cuts and offset fluctuations in the electricity network with the help of emergency power generators. In many areas, the hot and humid climate makes high demands on climate technology at production plants and on the refrigeration of finished products. Insufficient energy supply also leads to a situation where production hours must be handled very flexibly. This shortage can only be eliminated in the medium term and will require maximum effort. However, India’s government intends to expand power generation capacities to roughly 240 GW by the end of the 11th five-year plan in 2012. This would mean a more than 100 GW, or nearly 90%, increase on today's total. Moreover, the country’s lacking transport infrastructure is increasingly turning into a major obstacle.

The pharmaceuticals industry is especially dependent on road transport. However, the major transport links are chronically congested and many are in a poor state of repair. Of the total road network covering just over 3.3 million kilometres, only about 6% are relatively well built National and State Highways. In many cases, there are no paved surfaces or there is only one lane for all traffic. But the government has launched an extensive investment programme entitled the National Highway Development Programme, to be implemented by the middle of the next decade.

Outlook for India’s pharmaceutical industry up to 2015 All in all we expect India to see drugs sales rise by an annual 8% to nearly EUR 20 bn between 2006 and 2015. To be sure, this growth rate is higher than that seen for Germany (+5% p.a.) and the entire world (+6%). Nonetheless, India’s share in world pharmaceutical
sales will rise only marginally to a good 2%. Growth of India’s pharmaceutical industry and thus its share in
global drugs manufacturing could even be slightly higher if the infrastructure problems could be remedied quickly. While the pharmaceutical industries of China and Singapore will likely continue to show much higher growth, India looks set to even lose market share in Asia. Mainly affected by this development are smaller Indian companies with sales of up to EUR 10 m which focus on traditional Indian medicines. It is likely that many of these companies will merge or disappear from the market altogether. By contrast, large pharmaceutical companies with sales volumes of over EUR 50 m will be able to increase their sales as they will be
better equipped to adjust their product ranges to the demands of international markets. These firms will expand their capacities in India – mostly in the sector’s clusters surrounding Delhi and Mumbai – but will also take over firms in the industrial countries.

Medium-sized businesses will benefit from increasing contract production for western firms. All in all, the share of pharmaceuticals in the total chemicals industry in India will come to roughly 17% in 2015 (2006: 18%), compared
with 28% in Germany (from 24% in 2006). For the world as a whole, the ratio will likely be only slightly lower than the German level (25%). Although India’s pharmaceutical sector is growing strongly, the population’s demand for drugs cannot be met by the country’s own production in all segments. At EUR 1.5 bn, India’s total drugs imports are comparable in size to Norway’s entire pharmaceuticals market. Imports look set to continue to rise strongly.

On a medium-term horizon, one-fifth of the world’s pharma sales will be accounted for by the emerging markets. China will then be among the group of the five largest manufacturers, while India will join the group of the ten largest suppliers. High export growth of Indian drugs makers In the course of increasing contract production and low-cost manufacture of proprietary medicines, exports are expected to receive a major boost in future. However, Germany's very high export ratio of currently 55% will hardly be achieved by 2015, as this would imply more than a trebling of total exports. In this context, it should be considered that take-overs of foreign companies will lead
to a strong increase in foreign production by Indian manufacturers, which will have a dampening effect on exports. A positive impact on exports is expected from foreign investment in India, though.

Competition between Indian firms and western drug makers will probably be much fiercer as the companies from Asia are increasingly seeking to tap the global markets. The generics market will grow in both the developed countries and in the emerging markets. Most vital medicines are already exempt from patent protection today.
The manufacture of generic drugs in that segment is growing strongly. In addition, patents for high-turnover drugs with a volume of EUR 100 bn will expire in the next few years. Of these drugs, roughly one-third will likely be produced by Indian companies.

Summary
The pharmaceutical industry is expanding worldwide. For some years now, it has been benefiting from the particular dynamics of the Asian economies as both purchasers and producers. It is not only the markets in China and India that register high growth rates. Annual growth rates are also impressive in Singapore, Malaysia,
Thailand and Indonesia. Thanks to low costs, qualified staff and extensive production and research units India is becoming more and more of a major pharmaceutical location. Drivers of growth are the growing population, which at 1.5 bn should exceed that of China already in 2025, as well as the larger number of older people with markedly higher demand for medicines. Add to this the increase in middle-class households which have considerably higher incomes at their disposal than the population on average.

As a result of the new patent legislation, the country’s pharmaceutical industry is reorienting itself and focussing on self-developed medicines and/or contract research and production for western drugs companies. Also the expansion of Indian firms abroad looks set to continue – preferred target markets are the US and European
countries.

Despite the positive outlook India will lose market share in the Asian market in future. The winner, first and foremost, will be China, which will remain the No 1 thanks to its expected higher sales growth and volume, as Indian companies' strategic reorientation away from generics to original preparation is still in its infancy. The sooner India manages to close the infrastructure gap, the higher growth will be in the country’s pharmaceutical industry.

Source: India Drug Association, India Pharma Association, Deutsche Bank Research Report

Compiled By: CA. Aparna RamMohan. I can reached at caaparnasridhar@gmail.com

Greece Debt Crisis

Background
As the global economy is on its way to recovery, developments in Greece and a few other European countries might have greater than expected implications. While many foresee another slowdown, others think that the issue has been resolved with IMF and EU’s timely intervention.

To understand the implications of the developments taking place in Greece in particular and the Euro zone in general, FICCI has undertaken a quick survey amongst economists. The survey was conducted during the period May 10, 2010 to May 28, 2010.

As part of the survey, a structured questionnaire was drawn up and circulated amongst economists for their inputs and views. Eleven economists of repute participated in the survey. These economists largely come from the banking and financial sector. The sample however also includes economists from industry and research institutions.

FICCI sought the views of economists on five key concerns arising from the crisis –
(1) Possibility of the sovereign debt crisis of Greece spilling over to other nations;
(2) Possibility of global economy seeing a double dip recession;
(3) Whether the bailout provided by IMF and EU was the right approach;
(4) Likely impact of Greece crisis on India and
(5) RBI’s monetary policy stance in the light of emerging European crisis

The feedback received from the participating economists was collated and analyzed and the views obtained are presented by FICCI. The findings of the survey represents the views of the leading economists and do not reflect the views of the writer.

♣ Economists’ views on whether sovereign debt crisis of Greece could spill over to other nations
The majority view on this issue is that ring fencing of the Greece problem may prove to be a challenging task and that there is a good chance that other vulnerable economies in the region such as Portugal, Spain and Ireland may face a situation similar to that of Greece given their already weak public finances. Economists have also pointed out that countries like France could also come under some pressure as the country’s banking sector has large exposure to some of the above mentioned countries.
The chance of the crisis spreading to other European countries through the banking channel is higher as the risk of default is the most crucial issue at this stage. Notably, foreign banks are exposed to the tune of US$ 236.2 billion of public and private debt in Greece and nearly a third of this is held by French Banks. Banks could act as the conduit that can rattle the ecosystem in other countries that have large exposure to Greece and lookalikes.

♣ Economists’ views on possibility of global economy seeing a double dip recession
Most economists ruled out the possibility of a double dip recession due to Greece debt crisis. They however agreed that the global economy could see a situation of ‘below to average growth rate’ in the short to medium term owing to the reduction in growth in the Euro zone. European countries with high fiscal deficit and high debt obligations have announced stringent austerity measures like cut in public expenditure, hike in tax rates and cut in wages for the public sector employees. Economists feel that such strict austerity measures will lead to a reduction in consumption and investment demand in the economy and put a break on growth. Further, as credit ratings of some of the economies get downgraded, it will become difficult for them to raise fresh money from the markets. Already signs of this happening are visible on the horizon. Economists feel that global investors could single out the weaker economies and be reluctant to divert resources to such regions. This would limit availability of funds for these countries and could put further pressure on their growth rates. Even countries like France and Italy are under pressure on account of strain on their banking sector which could undermine growth in the region.
In short, while one can expect global growth and global trade flows to see some moderation in the near term, the dip would be much smaller than what was seen during the 2008/09 great recession.

♣ Economists’ views on whether the bailout provided by IMF and EU was the right approach
There is a consensus amongst all economists that there was no option at this point in time other than bailing out Greece from this difficult situation. All the participating economists spoke in one voice on this issue.
Economists have pointed out that the traditional medicine (lowering interest rates and devaluing currency) of working out of such a problem is not available to countries such as Greece that are part of the Euro currency. These economies do not have the flexibility of devaluing their currencies and returning to the path of high growth and greater competitiveness. The EU and IMF could do little at this juncture except to prop up these economies with the bail- out package and help restore confidence in their bond issues.
Allowing Greece to default would have had long term repercussions as it would inflate the overall debt and fiscal deficit. This could have posed serious questions on the viability and the stability of EU region and their currency Euro.
The participating economists criticized the fact that there was no central agency in the Euro zone to monitor public finances of member countries. In fact this has been a major challenge right from the beginning when the EU came into being.
Economists have mentioned that EU is a heterogeneous grouping with there being differences amongst countries in terms of stage of economic development. Ensuring fiscal discipline in such a situation was always difficult. Anyhow, just like ECB, which coordinates the monetary policy for the EU, there should have been a monitoring agency for keeping a tab on the fiscal situation in different constituent countries.

♣ Economists’ views on likely impact of Greece Crisis on India
India’s Exports to the EU region Economists ruled out the possibility of any hit on India’s overall exports if the crisis remains restricted to Greece, as India’s exports to this affected country accounts for just 1 to 2 percent of our overall global exports. Further, the impact will still be marginal even if the crisis spreads to other PIIGS countries as India’s export to PIIGS is also limited.
However, a generalized and widespread slowdown in the EU region, as expected by a few, would be a negative development for Indian exports as EU region accounts for about a fifth of our total global exports.
An additional point towards which attention was drawn relates to availability of trade finance in the EU region. As banks in the EU region suffer losses, they could well cut down on their overall operations including the business of trade finance and in case this happens then like all countries India too would see a slowdown in exports to the EU region.
A small set of economists have said that this slowdown in exports could shave off about 0.25 to 0.5 percentage points from India’s GDP growth in the year 2010-11.

Capital inflows to India
Majority of the economists felt that there could be a knee-jerk reaction here as capital market is sentiment driven. With deleveraging expected to continue in the global markets, there is likely to be flight of capital from equity markets in emerging economies including India.
Further, debt related flows could also be lower as global financial market players hesitate to invest in non- dollar areas. Consequently, capital flows to India could be on the lower side in the next six months or so.

Liquidity situation
With majority of the economists expecting capital flows into India to slow down if not completely reverse in the coming six months, the liquidity situation is also expected to be a little tight in the days and months ahead.

Rupee value
With majority of the economists expecting the sell off pressure from FIIs in the Indian markets to continue from some time, the Rupee is expected to be under pressure in the near term. Already we have seen the Rupee depreciate against the US$ quite a bit in recent times. INR in fact posted its biggest weekly decline for the week ended May 21, 2010 in nearly 14 years, amidst concerns about euro zone’s growth prospects and implications for funds flows into India.

♣ Economists’ views on RBI’s monetary policy stance in light of emerging European crisis
Majority of the economists have pointed out that while concerns over inflation would last for some more time, concerns of liquidity are expected to build up fast on account of slowdown / reversal in capital flows, 3G payments, advance tax flows and overseas banks resources getting preempted due to the crisis.
They further added that RBI would ensure enough liquidity in the system to keep the growth momentum going, and may therefore not be in a hurry to raise interest rates. This camp was of the view that inflation is likely to dip in the second half of the year due to the high base effect in the same period last year. Also, if the monsoon this year is good as forecasted, the inflationary pressure would further ease. RBI can therefore be expected to act keeping in mind the liquidity situation and this would mean some pause in policy action.
While the above is the majority view, there is a feeling amongst a smaller set of participants that inflation will continue to be the focus of the central bank and it will continue with its current monetary policy stance of gradual tightening up. This set of economists were of the opinion that given the liquidity challenge at best you can expect that RBI would refrain from any intra policy date rate hikes. Finally, while RBI is expected to continue moving the rates up the quantum may be restricted to 25 bps.

♣ Economists’ views on whether sovereign debt crisis of Greece could spill over other nations
The developments taking place in Greece have raised a lot of concern on the ability of other European nations, which find themselves in the same predicament, to meet their financial obligations. While some of the other economies under the lens may not have the extreme combination of very high public debt and high fiscal deficit as seen in case of Greece, yet the situation is far from comfortable.

Data made available by the European Commission shows that debt to GDP ratio in case of Italy stands at 116 percent, in case of Portugal the figure is 77 percent, in case of Ireland 64 percent and Spain 53 percent. The budget deficit figure as a proportion of GDP for Italy is 5.3 percent, for Portugal 9.4 percent, for Ireland 14.3 percent and for Spain 11.2 percent. In case of Greece these numbers stand at 115 percent and 13.6 percent respectively.

Given the fragile situation prevailing in the Euro zone, FICCI asked the participating economists whether they see the sovereign debt crisis of Greece spilling over to other countries. The majority view on this issue is that ring fencing of the Greece problem may prove to be a challenging task and that there is a good chance that other vulnerable economies in the region such as Portugal, Spain and Ireland may face a situation similar to that of Greece given their already weak public finances. Economists have also pointed out that countries like France could also come under some pressure as the country’s banking sector has large exposure to some of the above mentioned countries.

In fact the chances of the crisis spreading to other European countries through the banking channel is higher as the risk of default is the most crucial issue at this stage. Notably, foreign banks are exposed to the tune of US$ 236.2 billion of public and private debt in Greece and nearly a third of this is held by French Banks. Banks could act as the conduit that can rattle the ecosystem in other countries that have large exposure to Greece and lookalikes.
Economists that participated in the FICCI survey also opined that given the large debt holdings of Greece, banks will have to mark down at least a part of it in the coming days. As this happens, capital base of banks will get eroded and this will limit their lending power. The consequent implication for liquidity in the region and beyond is thereof a matter of serious concern.

While the Euro zone economies are certainly in a difficult situation given the intricate linkages through the banking channels, economies of US and UK may not get affected much due to the Greece crisis according to majority of the participating economists.

♣ Economists’ views on possibility of global economy seeing a double dip recession
The ‘sudden’ problem in Greece has led many people to believe that this could impede the ongoing recovery in economic activity worldwide. Quite similar to corporations, countries would most likely traverse the path of ‘going slow on expansion’ and practice austerity in every aspect possible. While the US has voiced concerns over the Greece issue terming it as a ‘potentially serious setback’, Emerging economies in Asia too are vulnerable, said the IMF, recently. FICCI sought economist’s views on whether there exists a chance of a double dip recession.

Though most economists ruled out the possibility of a double dip recession due to Greece debt  crisis, they agreed that the global economy could see a situation of ‘below to average growth rate’ in the short to medium term owing to the reduction in growth in the Euro zone.
They are of the opinion that unlike the financial meltdown that originated in US and had a global impact, the Greece debt crisis would have a targeted impact mostly on Euro zone. As mentioned earlier, some of the other EU countries like Spain, Portugal, Ireland and France could also see a growth momentum getting impacted. The chances of Germany having a downturn however have been ruled out. On the whole, the Euro Zone may see a reduction in overall growth rate.

European countries with high fiscal deficit and high debt obligations have announced stringent austerity measures like cut in public expenditure, hike in tax rates and cut in wages for the public sector employees. Economists feel that such strict austerity measures will inevitably lead to a reduction in consumption and investment demand in the economy and put a break on growth. This slowing down of the economy will have implications for government revenues as these depend on overall economic activity level.

Further, as credit ratings of some of the economies get downgraded, it will become difficult for them to raise fresh money from the markets. Already signs of this happening are visible on the horizon. Economists feel that global investors could single out the weaker economies and be reluctant to divert resources to such regions. This would limit availability of funds for these countries and could put further pressure on their growth rates. An additional point that emerged from the responses is that besides performance in the Euro zone, global growth would be affected by the way other economies react to the evolving situation. Notably, the first phase of recovery came on the back of massive stimulus packages that were announced by governments and central banks across countries. Already there are signs of some economies reversing these measures as they gear up to deal with other related macro issues such as inflation. Both India and China have taken such steps in the recent past. How countries calibrate their stimulus measures in 2010 will also have a bearing on global growth.
In short, while one can expect global growth and global trade flows to see some moderation in the near term, the dip would be significantly smaller than what was seen during the 2008/09 great recession.

♣ Economists’ views on whether the bailout provided by IMF and EU was the right approach
The financial-market selloff in the wake of the Greek debt crisis had started to resemble the situation following the collapse of US investment bank Lehman Brothers in autumn 2008. Given the way markets were reacting to this emerging problem in Greece, and the fact that it could spread to other parts of the Euro zone, some bold action was called for on part of the policy makers. Although initially there was a lot of resistance and flip flop seen on whether the Greek government should be supported in this hour of need, eventually a massive support package was sealed together by the IMF, EU and the ECB.

The program approved by the IMF’s Board makes about €5.5 billion immediately available to Greece from the Fund as part of joint financing with the European Union for a combined €20.0 billion in immediate financial support. In 2010, total IMF financing will amount to about €10 billion and will be partnered with about €30.0 billion committed by the EU. The joint financing means that Greece will not have to tap international financial markets until 2012, providing a breathing space for Greece to put its finances in order and get its economy back on track.
FICCI sought the opinion of economists on whether this was the right approach to deal with the situation and whether there was an alternate to the bailout provided by IMF and EU. Feedback received shows that there is a consensus amongst all economists that there was no option at this point in time other than bailing out Greece from this difficult situation. All the participating economists spoke in one voice on this issue.

Economists have pointed out that the traditional medicine (lowering interest rates and devaluing currency) of working out of such a problem is not available to countries such as Greece that are part of the Euro currency. These economies do not have the flexibility of devaluing their currencies and returning to the path of high growth and greater competitiveness. The EU and IMF could do little at this juncture except to prop up these economies with the bail- out package and help restore confidence in their bond issues.
The participants strongly mentioned that allowing Greece to default would have had long term repercussions as it would inflate the overall debt and fiscal deficit. This could have posed serious questions on the viability and the stability of EU region and their currency Euro. The participating economists have criticized the fact that there was no central agency in the Euro zone to monitor public finances of member countries. In fact this has been a major challenge right from the beginning when the EU came into being. Economists have mentioned that EU is a heterogeneous grouping with there being differences amongst countries in terms of stage of economic development.

Ensuring fiscal discipline in such a situation was always difficult. Anyhow, just like ECB, which coordinates the monetary policy for the EU, there should have been a monitoring agency for keeping a tab on the fiscal situation in different constituent countries. Economists have also opined that the bailout package will only prove to be a temporary relief for countries from this region. This arrangement would enable Greece to ward off an immediate default. However, medium to long term solvency issues remain. It is therefore important that countries like Greece plan out how their large stimulus packages would be paid off. There is an also urgent need to increase earning capacity. Survey respondents have mentioned that counties will have to maintain pressure on Greece to implement the austerity measures as promised as any deviation from the path of fiscal rectitude could seriously undermine the ongoing efforts to contain the crisis.

♣ Economists’ views on likely impact of Greece Crisis on India
No one is immune in this globally interconnected financial commune - this is the verdict from the economists that responded to FICCI’s questions on what impact Greece crisis could have on India. Economists have mentioned that there is adequate evidence now that indicates that there is nothing like ‘decoupling’ with respect to financial markets. While the impact on the trade because of the Greece crisis is something that we have to wait and see, the turbulence in the PIIGS economies has certainly started affecting other areas as is evident from the withdrawal of FIIs from Indian market. The economists outlined the following areas with varied degree of impact in our discussion with them.

India’s Exports to the EU region
Economists ruled out the possibility of any hit on India’s overall exports if the crisis remains restricted to Greece, as India’s exports to this affected country accounts for just 1 to 2 percent of our overall global exports. Further, the impact will still be marginal even if the crisis spreads to other PIIGS countries as India’s export to PIIGS is also limited.
The problems for India’s exports would magnify if the entire EU region gets into a downward spiral of growth. As mentioned earlier, growth in the EU region because of the evolving developments could slowdown in the near term. As economies undertake austerity measures, economic activity would suffer. A generalized and widespread slowdown in the EU region, as expected by a few, would be a negative development for Indian exports as EU region accounts for about a fifth of our total global exports.

An additional point towards which attention was drawn by the economists’ relates to availability of trade finance in the EU region. As banks in the EU region suffer losses, they could well cut down on their overall operations including the business of trade finance and in case this happens then like all countries India too would see a slowdown in exports to the EU region.

A small set of economists have said that this slowdown in exports could shave off about 0.25 to 0.5 percentage points from India’s GDP growth in the year 2010-11.


Source: FICCI Quick Survey on Greece Debt Crisis
Compiled into an article by: CA. Aparna RamMohan. You can reach me at caaparnasridhar@gmail.com