Yasheng Huang: Does democracy stifle economic growth?

Prevoditelj: Ilijana Vargovic Radic Recezent: Tilen Pigac - EFZG

My topic

Moja tema

is economic growth in China and India.

je ekonomski rast u Kini i Indiji.

And the question I want to explore with you

Pitanje koje želim istražiti s vama

is whether or not

je da li je

democracy has helped or has hindered

demokracija potpomognula ili potisnula

economic growth.

ekonomski rast i razvoj.

You may say this is not fair,

Možete reći da ovo nije pošteno

because I'm selecting two countries

jer izabirem dvije zemlje

to make a case against democracy.

da bih podignuo slučaj protiv demokracije.

Actually, exactly the opposite

No zapravo, upravo obrnuto

is what I'm going to do.

je ono što ću napraviti.

I'm going to use these two countries

Iskoristiti ću ove dvije zemlje

to make an economic argument for democracy,

za ekonomski argument u prilog demokraciji

rather than against democracy.

umjesto protiv demokracije.

The first question there

Prvo pitanje ovdje

is why China has grown so much faster

je zašto je Kina napredovala toliko brže

than India.

od Indije.

Over the last 30 years,

U zadnjih trideset godina,

in terms of the GDP growth rates,

prema stopi rasta BDP-a,

China has grown at twice the rate of India.

Kina se uzdigla dvostruko od Indije.

In the last five years,

U zadnjih pet godina,

the two countries have begun to converge somewhat

ove dvije zemlje su se započele polako približavati

in economic growth.

u ekonomskom rastu.

But over the last 30 years,

Doduše, tokom zadnjih trideset godina,

China undoubtedly

Kina je, bespredmetno,

has done much better than India.

postignula više od Indije.

One simple answer

Jednostavno objašnjenje

is China has Shanghai and India has Mumbai.

je da Kina ima Šangaj a Indija Mumbai.

Look at the skyline of Shanghai.

Pogledajte panoramu Šangaja.

This is the Pudong area.

Ovo je Pudong područje.

The picture on India

Slika Indije

is the Dharavi slum of Mumbai

je Dharavi sirotinjska četvrt Mumbaija

in India.

u Indiji.

The idea there

Ideja

behind these two pictures

iza ove dvije slike

is that the Chinese government

je da kineska vlada

can act above rule of law.

može postupiti protivno vladavini zakona.

It can plan

Može planirati

for the long-term benefits of the country

dugoročne dobrobiti za zemlju

and in the process,

i u procesu

evict millions of people --

iseliti milijune ljudi --

that's just a small technical issue.

to je samo mali tehnički problem.

Whereas in India, you cannot do that,

No u Indiji to ne možete napraviti

because you have to listen to the public.

jer morate slušati javnost.

You're being constrained by the public's opinion.

Obuzdavani ste javnim mijenjem.

Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

Čak se i premijer Manmohan Singh

agrees with that view.

slaže s ovim stajalištem.

In an interview

U intervjuu

printed in the financial press of India,

u financijskim medijima Indije,

He said that he wants to make Mumbai

rekao je da želi Mumbai napraviti

another Shanghai.

drugim Šangajem.

This is an Oxford-trained economist

Ovo je Oxfordski educiran ekonomist

steeped in humanistic values,

humanističkih vrijednosti

and yet he agrees

a ipak se slaže

with the high-pressure tactics of Shanghai.

s ogromnim pritiskom šangajskih taktika.

So let me call it the Shanghai model of economic growth,

Dopustite mi da to prozovem šangajskim modelom ekonomskog rasta i razvoja

that emphasizes the following features

koji naglašava sljedeća obilježja

for promoting economic development:

za promoviranje ekonomskog razvoja:

infrastructures, airports,

infrastrukture, aerodromi,

highways, bridges, things like that.

autoceste, mostovi, stvari poput ovih.

And you need a strong government to do that,

Potrebna vam je snažna vlast za provođenje ovih mjera

because you cannot respect private property rights.

jer ne možete poštivati prava privatnog vlasništva.

You cannot be constrained by the public's opinion.

Ne mošete biti obuzdani javnim mišljenjem.

You need also state ownership,

Također trebate državno vlasništvo,

especially of land assets,

osobito zemljišta,

in order to build and roll out infrastructures

u svrhu gradnje i stanjenja infrastruktura

very quickly.

većom brzinom.

The implication of that model

Implikacija ovog modela

is that democracy

je da je demokracija

is a hindrance for economic growth,

zapreka ekonomskom rastu,

rather than a facilitator of economic growth.

a ne podupiratelj ekonomskom rastu i razvoju.

Here's the key question.

Ovo je dakle ključno pitanje.

Just how important are infrastructures

Koliko su, zapravo, važne infrastrukture

for economic growth?

za ekonomski rast?

This is a key issue.

Ovo je ključna problematika.

If you believe that infrastructures are very important for economic growth,

Ukoliko vjerujete da su infrastrukture veoma važne za ekonomski rast,

then you would argue a strong government is necessary

onda biste tvrdili da je snažna vlast potrebna

to promote growth.

za promoviranje rasta.

If you believe

Ukoliko vjerujete

that infrastructures are not as important as many people believe,

da infrastrukture nisu toliko važne koliko mnogo ljudi vjeruje,

then you will put less emphasis

onda ćete staviti manji naglasak

on strong government.

na snažnu vlast.

So to illustrate that question,

U svrhu ilustriranja tog pitanja,

let me give you two countries.

dajem vam dvije zemlje.

And for the sake of brevity,

Zbog sažetosti,

I'll call one country Country 1

nazvat ću jednu zemlju Zemlja 1

and the other country Country 2.

i drugu Zemlja 2.

Country 1

Zemlja 1

has a systematic advantage over Country 2

ima sistemsku prednost nad Zemljom 2

in infrastructures.

u infrastrukturama.

Country 1 has more telephones,

Zemlja 1 ima više telefona

and Country 1 has a longer system of railways.

i Zemlja 1 ima duži sistem željeznica.

So if I were to ask you,

Ukoliko vas upitam:

"Which is China

"Koja zemlja je Kina

and which is India,

a koja Indija,

and which country has grown faster?"

te koja se zemlja brže razvila?"

if you believe in the infrastructure view,

ako vjerujete u infastrukturno stajalište,

then you will say, "Country 1 must be China.

onda ćete reći: " Zemlja 1 mora biti Kina.

They must have done better, in terms of economic growth.

Morali su napredovati bolje u smislu ekonomskog rasta.

And Country 2 is possibly India."

Zemlja 2 je vjerojatno Indija".

Actually the country with more telephones

Zapravo, zemlja s više telefona

is the Soviet Union,

je Sovjetski Savez,

and the data referred to 1989.

a podaci datiraju iz 1989.

After the country reported very impressive statistics on telephones,

Nakon što je zemlja prijavila vrlo impresivnu statistiku o telefonima,

the country collapsed.

propala je.

That's not too good.

To nije dobro.

The picture there is Khrushchev.

Ovo je slika Khrushcheva.

I know that in 1989

Znam da 1989.

he no longer ruled the Soviet Union,

više nije vladao Sovjetskim Savezom,

but that's the best picture that I can find.

ali to je najbolja slika koju sam mogao pronaći.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Telephones, infrastructures

Telefoni, infrastrukture

do not guarantee you economic growth.

ne garantiraju vam ekonomski rast.

Country 2, that has fewer telephones,

Zemlja 2, koja ima manje telefona,

is China.

je Kina.

Since 1989,

Od 1989.,

the country has performed at a double-digit rate

zemlja je producirala dvoznamenkastu stopu

every year for the last 20 years.

svake godine zadnjih 20 godina.

If you know nothing about China and the Soviet Union

Ukoliko ništa ne znate o Kini i Sovjetima

other than the fact about their telephones,

osim podatka o njihovim telefonima,

you would have made a poor prediction

možda ste došli do slabe procijene

about their economic growth

njihovog ekonomskog rasta

in the next two decades.

u sljedeća dva desetljeća.

Country 1, that has a longer system of railways,

Zemlja 1, koja ima duži sistem željeznica,

is actually India.

je zapravo Indija.

And Country 2 is China.

A Zemlja 2 je Kina.

This is a very little known fact

Ovo je vrlo slabo poznata činjenica

about the two countries.

o ove dvije zemlje.

Yes, today China has a huge infrastructure advantage

Da, danas Kina ima ogromnu infrastrukturnu prednost

over India.

nad Indijom.

But for many years,

Ali dugi niz godina,

until the late 1990s,

do kasnih devedesetih,

China had an infrastructure disadvantage

Kina je imala infrastrukturnu zapreku

vis-a-vis India.

vis-a-vis Indije.

In developing countries,

U zemljama u razvoju,

the most common mode of transportation

najčešći oblik prijevoza

is the railways,

su željeznice,

and the British built a lot of railways in India.

a Britanci su izgradili puno željeznica u Indiji.

India is the smaller of the two countries,

Indija je manja od ovih dviju zemalja,

and yet it had a longer system of railways

no ipak je imala duži sistem željeznica

until the late 1990s.

do kasnih devedesetih.

So clearly,

Jasno je da

infrastructure doesn't explain

infrastruktura ne objašnjava

why China did better before the late 1990s,

zašto je Kina napredovala bolje prije kasnih devedesetih

as compared with India.

u usporedbi s Indijom.

In fact, if you look at the evidence worldwide,

Ustvari, ukoliko pogledate dokaze diljem svijeta

the evidence is more supportive of the view

oni više podupiru stajalište

that the infrastructure are actually the result of economic growth.

da je infrastruktura zapravo rezultat ekonomskog rasta.

The economy grows,

Ekonomija raste,

government accumulates more resources,

vlast akumulira više resursa,

and the government can invest in infrastructure --

i vlast može investirati u infrastrukturu --

rather than infrastructure being a cause

umjesto da je infrastruktura razlog

for economic growth.

ekonomskog rasta.

And this is clearly the story

Ovo je očito priča

of the Chinese economic growth.

kineskog ekonomskog rasta.

Let me look at this question more directly.

Dopustite mi da direktnije pogledam ovo pitanje.

Is democracy bad for economic growth?

Da li je demokracija loša za ekonomski rast?

Now let's turn to two countries,

Okrenimo se sada dvjema zemljama.

Country A and Country B.

Zemlja A i Zemlja B.

Country A, in 1990,

Zemlja A, 1990-te,

had about $300 per capita GDP

je imala oko 300 dolara BDP-a po glavi stanovnika

as compared with Country B,

u usporedbi sa Zemljom B,

which had $460 in per capita GDP.

koja je imala 460 dolara po glavi stanovnika.

By 2008,

Do 2008. godine

Country A has surpassed Country B

Zemlja A je prešišala Zemlju B

with $700 per capita GDP

sa 700 dolara po glavi stanovnika

as compared with $650 per capita GDP.

u usporedbi sa 650 dolara BDP-a po glavi stanovnika.

Both countries are in Asia.

Obje zemlje su u Aziji.

If I were to ask you,

Ukoliko vas upitam,

"Which are the two Asian countries?

"Koje su to dvije azijske zemlje?

And which one is a democracy?"

Koja je demokracija?"

you may argue,

možete tvrditi:

"Well, maybe Country A is China

"Možda je Zemlja A Kina

and Country B is India."

a Zemlja B Indija".

In fact, Country A

Ustvari, Zemlja A

is democratic India,

je demokratska Indija,

and Country B is Pakistan --

a Zemlja B je Pakistan --

the country that has a long period

zemlja koja ima dugi period

of military rule.

vojnog vodstva.

And it's very common

Česta je

that we compare India with China.

usporedba Indije s Kinom.

That's because the two countries

To je zato jer ove dvije zemlje

have about the same population size.

imaju otprilike isti broj stanovnika.

But the more natural comparison

Prirodnija usporedba

is actually between India and Pakistan.

je zapravo između Indije i Pakistana.

Those two countries are geographically similar.

Ove dvije zemlje su geografski slične.

They have a complicated, but shared common history.

Imaju kompliciranu ali zajedničku prošlost.

By that comparison,

U usporedbi,

democracy looks very, very good

demokracija izgleda vrlo, vrlo dobro

in terms of economic growth.

u pogledu ekonomskog rasta.

So why do economists fall in love

Zašto se onda ekonomisti zaljubljuju

with authoritarian governments?

u autoritativne vlade?

One reason is the East Asian Model.

Jedan razlog je Istočno Azijski Model.

In East Asia,

U istočnoj Aziji,

we have had successful economic growth stories

imali smo uspješne priče ekonomskog rasta

such as Korea, Taiwan,

poput Koreje, Tajvana,

Hong Kong and Singapore.

Hong Konga i Singapura.

Some of these economies

Neke od ovih ekonomija

were ruled by authoritarian governments

su bile pod vodstvom autoritativnih vlada

in the 60s and 70s

u šezdesetima i sedamdesetima

and 1980s.

te 1980-tih godina.

The problem with that view

Problem s tim stajalištem

is like asking all the winners of lotteries,

je poput pitati sve dobitnike lutrija:

"Have you won the lottery?"

"Da li ste dobili na lutriji?"

And they all tell you, "Yes, we have won the lottery."

A oni vam svi odgovore, "Da, dobili smo na lutriji".

And then you draw the conclusion

Onda dođete do zaključka

the odds of winning the lottery

da su šanse za dobitak na lutriji

are 100 percent.

100 postotne.

The reason is you never go

Razlog je da nikada ne odete

and bother to ask the losers

pitati gubitnike

who also purchased lottery tickets

koji su također kupili lutrijske listiće

and didn't end up winning the prize.

i nisu osvojili nagradu.

For each of these successful authoritarian governments

Za svaku od ovih uspješnih autoritativnih vlada

in East Asia,

u istočnoj Aziji,

there's a matched failure.

postoji usporedan gubitak.

Korea succeeded, North Korea didn't.

Koreja je uspjela, Sjeverna Koreja nije.

Taiwan succeeded, China under Mao Zedong didn't.

Tajvan je uspio, Kina pod Mao Zedongom nije.

Burma didn't succeed.

Burma nije uspjela.

The Philippines didn't succeed.

Filipini nisu uspjeli.

If you look at the statistical evidence worldwide,

Ukoliko pogledate statističke dokaze globalno,

there's really no support for the idea

ustvari ne postoji potpora za ideju

that authoritarian governments

da autoritativne vlade

hold a systematic edge over democracies

drže sistematsku prednost nad demokracijama

in terms of economic growth.

u pogledu ekonomskog rasta.

So the East Asian model

Istočno azijski model

has this massive selection bias --

ima masivnu selekcijsku predrasudu --

it is known as selecting on a dependent variable,

poznatu kao odabir na zavisnu varijablu,

something we always tell our students to avoid.

nešto što mi uvijek kažemo našim studentima da izbjegavaju.

So exactly why did China grow so much faster?

Zašto je onda Kina tako brzo napredovala?

I will take you to the Cultural Revolution,

Vodim vas kroz Kulturološku Revoluciju,

when China went mad,

kada je Kina poludjela,

and compare that country's performance with India

i usporedit ću njezino dostignuće u usporedbi s Indijom

under Indira Gandhi.

pod Indirom Gandhi.

The question there is: Which country did better,

Ovdje je pitanje: Koja je zemlja postigla više,

China or India?

Kina ili Indija?

China was during the Cultural Revolution.

Kina je bila pod Kulturološkom Revolucijom.

It turns out even during the Cultural Revolution,

Ispostavlja se da je čak i tokom Revolucije,

China out-perfomed India

Kina premašila Indiju

in terms of GDP growth

u pogledu BDP rasta

by an average of about 2.2 percent every year

u prosjeku od oko 2,2 posto svake godine

in terms of per capita GDP.

u pogledu BDP-a po glavi stanovnika.

So that's when China was mad.

Dakle to je bilo tijekom lumperaja u Kini.

The whole country went mad.

Cijela zemlja je poludjela.

It must mean that the country

Ovo mora značiti da je zemlja

had something so advantageous to itself in terms of economic growth

imala nešto toliko u prednosti prema sebi u pogledu ekonomskog razvoja

to overcome the negative effects

da bi prešla negativne posljedice

of the Cultural Revolution.

Kulturološke Revolucije.

The advantage the country had

Prednost koju je zemlja imala

was human capital --

je bio ljudski kapital --

nothing else but human capital.

ništa drugo doli ljudski kapital.

This is the world development index indicator data

Ovo je indeks svjetskog pokazatelja podataka razvoja

in the early 1990s.

u ranim 90tima.

And this is the earliest data that I can find.

Ovo su najraniji podaci koje sam pronašao.

The adult literacy rate in China

Postotak pismenosti odraslih u Kini

is 77 percent

je 77 posto

as compared with 48 percent in India.

usporedno sa 48 posto u Indiji.

The contrast in literacy rates

Kontrast u omjeru pismenosti

is especially sharp

je posebno oštar

between Chinese women and Indian women.

između kineskih žena i indijskih žena.

I haven't told you about the definition of literacy.

Nisam vam napomenuo definiciju pismenosti.

In China, the definition of literacy

U Kini, definicija pismenosti

is the ability to read and write

je sposobnost pisanja i čitanja

1,500 Chinese characters.

1.500 kineskih znakova.

In India, the definition of literacy,

U Indiji, definicija pismenosti,

operating definition of literacy,

operativna definicija pismenosti,

is the ability, the grand ability,

je sposobnost, velika sposobnost,

to write your own name

napisati vlastito ime

in whatever language you happen to speak.

u bilo kojem jeziku koji govorite.

The gap between the two countries in terms of literacy

Nesrazmjer između dvije zemlje po pitanju pismenosti

is much more substantial

je puno više značajan

than the data here indicated.

nego podaci koji su ovdje iskazani.

If you go to other sources of data

Ukoliko potražite druge izvore podataka

such as Human Development Index,

poput HDI, Indeks Ljudskog Razvoja,

that data series,

ta serija podataka,

go back to the early 1970s,

počevši od ranih 70tih,

you see exactly the same contrast.

pokazuje točno isti kontrast.

China held a huge advantage

Kina je imala ogromnu prednost

in terms of human capital

u pogledu ljudskog kapitala

vis-a-vis India.

vis-a-vis Indije.

Life expectancies:

Očekivana životna dob:

as early as 1965,

od rane 1965. godine,

China had a huge advantage in life expectancy.

Kina je imala ogromnu prednost u prosječnoj životnoj dobi.

On average, as a Chinese in 1965,

U prosjeku, kao kinez 1965.godine,

you lived 10 years more

živjeli ste 10 godina više

than an average Indian.

od prosječnog indijca.

So if you have a choice

Dakle, ukoliko imate izbor

between being a Chinese and being an Indian,

između biti kinezom i biti indijcem,

you would want to become a Chinese

htjeli biste postati kinezom

in order to live 10 years longer.

kako biste živjeli 10 godina duže.

If you made that decision in 1965,

Ukoliko ste napravili takvu odluku 1965. godine,

the down side of that

nedostatak ovog

is the next year we have the Cultural Revolution.

je da ste sljedeće godine imali Kulturološku Revoluciju.

So you have to always think carefully

Dakle, morate uvijek pažljivo razmisliti

about these decisions.

o ovakvim odlukama.

If you cannot chose your nationality,

Ako ne možete izabrati svoju nacionalnost

then you will want to become an Indian man.

tada ćete htjeti postati indijac.

Because, as an Indian man,

Kao indijac

you have about two years of life expectancy advantage

imate prednost dvije godine dužeg života

vis-a-vis Indian women.

vis-a-vis indijke.

This is an extremely strange fact.

Ovo je uistinu čudna činjenica.

It's very rare among countries

Vrlo je rijetko među zemljama

to have this kind of pattern.

imati ovakav uzorak.

It shows the systematic discrimination and biases

Ovo pokazuje sistemsku diskriminaciju i predrasude

in the Indian society

u indijskom društvu

against women.

protiv žena.

The good news is, by 2006,

Dobre vijesti su da je do 2006.

India has closed the gap

Indija zatvorila nesrazmjer

between men and women

između muškaraca i žena

in terms of life expectancy.

po pitanju očekivane životne dobi.

Today, Indian women have a sizable life expectancy edge

Danas, indijske žene imaju popriličnu prednost u očekivanoj životnoj dobi

over Indian men.

naspram indijaca.

So India is reverting to the normal.

Dakle, Indija se normalizira.

But India still has a lot of work to do

No ima još puno rada ispred sebe

in terms of gender equality.

po pitanju rodne jednakosti.

These are the two pictures

Ovo su dvije slike

taken of garment factories in Guangdong Province

uzete iz tekstilne tvornice u Guangdong provinciji

and garment factories in India.

i tekstilne tvornice u Indiji.

In China, it's all women.

U Kini, vidimo samo žene.

60 to 80 percent of the workforce in China is women

60 do 80 posto radne snage u Kini su žene

in the coastal part of the country,

u obalnom području,

whereas in India, it's all men.

dok su u Indiji svi muškarci radna snaga.

Financial Times printed this picture

Financijski Times je izdao ovu sliku

of an Indian textile factory

indijske tekstilne tvornice

with the title, "India Poised to Overtake China in Textile."

pod naslovom: "Indija će preuzeti Kinu u tekstilu".

By looking at these two pictures,

Gledajući ove dvije slike,

I say no, it won't overtake China for a while.

kažem ne, neće preuzeti Kinu još neko vrijeme.

If you look at other East Asian countries,

Ukoliko pogledate druge istočno azijske zemlje,

women there play a hugely important role

žene igraju izuzetno važnu ulogu

in terms of economic take-off --

u pogledu ekonomskog uzdizanja --

in terms of creating the manufacturing miracle

u pogledu kreiranja proizvodnog čuda

associated with East Asia.

povezanog s istočnom Azijom.

India still has a long way to go

Indija još ima dalek put

to catch up with China.

kako bi uhvatila korak s Kinom.

Then the issue is,

Problem je

what about the Chinese political system?

što je s kineskim političkim sistemom?

You talk about human capital,

Govorite o ljudskom kapitalu,

you talk about education and public health.

govorite o edukaciji i javnom zdravstvu.

What about the political system?

Što je s političkim sistemom?

Isn't it true that the one-party political system

Zar nije istina da je jednostranačje političkog sistema

has facilitated economic growth in China?

pridonijelo ekonomskom rastu u Kini?

Actually, the answer is more nuanced and subtle than that.

Zapravo, odgovor je više neizražen.

It depends on a distinction that you draw

Ovisi o distinkciji koju izvodite

between statics of the political system

između statike političkog sistema

and the dynamics of the political system.

i dinamike političkog sistema.

Statically, China is a one-party system,

Statički, Kina je jednostranačni sistem,

authoritarian -- there's no question about it.

autoritativan -- ovo nije upitno.

Dynamically, it has changed over time

Dinamički, promijenjeno je tokom vremena

to become less authoritarian and more democratic.

da bi postalo manje autoritativno i više demokratski.

When you explain change --

Kada objašnjavate promjenu --

for example, economic growth;

naprimjer, ekonomski rast;

economic growth is about change --

ekonomski rast se vrti oko promjene ---

when you explain change,

kada objašnjavate promjenu

you use other things that have changed to explain change,

koristite druge stvari koje su se promjenile da biste objasnili promjenu,

rather than using the constant to explain change.

za razliku od korištenja konstante da biste objasnili promjenu.

Sometimes a fixed effect can explain change,

Ponekad, fiksiran efekt može objasniti promjenu,

but a fixed effect only explains changes

ali objašnjava samo promjene

in interaction with the things that change.

u interakciji sa stvarima koje se mijenjaju.

In terms of the political changes,

U pogledu političkih promjena

they have introduced village elections.

oni su uveli seoske izbore.

They have increased the security of proprietors.

Povećali su sigurnost posjednika.

And they have increased the security

Povećali su sigurnost

with long-term land leases.

s dugoročnim zemljišnim najmom.

There are also financial reforms in rural China.

Postoje i financijske reforme u ruralnoj Kini.

There is also a rural entrepreneurial revolution in China.

Postoji i ruralna poduzetnička revolucija u Kini.

To me, the pace of political changes

Za mene, brzina političkih promjena

is too slow, too gradual.

je previše spora i postepena.

And my own view is the country

Moje osobno stajalište je da će se zemlja

is going to face some substantial challenges,

suočiti s važnim izazovima

because they have not moved further and faster on political reforms.

jer se nisu pomaknuli dalje niti brže u političkim reformama.

But nevertheless,

No unatoč tome,

the system has moved in a more liberal direction,

sistem se je pomaknuo u liberalnijem smjeru,

moved in a more democratic direction.

pomaknuo se u demokratskom smjeru.

You can apply exactly the same dynamic perspective on India.

Možete aplicirati istu dinamičnu perspektivu na Indiju.

In fact, when India was growing

Ustvari, kada je Indija rasla

at a Hindu rate of growth --

po Hindu stopi rasta --

about one percent, two percent a year --

od oko jedan posto, dva posto godišnje --

that was when India was least democratic.

tada je Indija bila najmanje demokratski nastrojena.

Indira Gandhi declared emergency rule in 1975.

Indira Gandhi je objavila izvanrednu vlast 1975. godine.

The Indian government owned and operated

Indijska vlada je imala u vlasništvu i vodila

all the TV stations.

sve TV postaje.

A little-known fact about India in the 1990s

Manje poznata činjenica o Indiji devedesetih godina

is that the country

je da je zemlja

not only has undertaken economic reforms,

ne samo potaknula ekonomske reforme

the country has also undertaken political reforms

nego i političke reforme

by introducing village self-rule,

uvodeći seosko samoupravljanje,

privatization of media

privatizaciju medija

and introducing freedom of information acts.

i uvela slobodu infomacijskih dokumenata.

So the dynamic perspective

Dinamička perspektiva

fits both with China and in India

pristaje i uz Kinu i u Indiji

in terms of the direction.

u pogledu smjera.

Why do many people believe

Zašto mnogi ljudi vjeruju

that India is still a growth disaster?

da je Indija i dalje razvojna katastrofa?

One reason

Jedan razlog

is they are always comparing India with China.

je da uvijek uspoređuju Indiju s Kinom.

But China is a superstar

No Kina je superzvijezda

in terms of economic growth.

u pogledu ekonomskog rasta.

If you are a NBA player

Ako ste NBA igrač

and you are always being compared to Michael Jordan,

i uvijek vas uspoređuju s Michael Jordanom,

you're going to look not so impressive.

nećete izgledati vrlo impresivno.

But that doesn't mean

Ali to ne znači

that you're a bad basketball player.

da ste loš košarkaš..

Comparing with a superstar

Usporedba sa superzvijezdom

is the wrong benchmark.

je krivo mjerilo.

In fact, if you compare India

Ustvari, ukoliko uspoređujete Indiju

with the average developing country,

s prosječnom zemljom u razvoju,

even before the more recent period

čak i prije nedavnog perioda

of acceleration of Indian growth --

ubrzanja indijskog rasta --

now India is growing between eight and nine percent --

sada Indija raste između osam i devet posto --

even before this period,

čak i prije ovog perioda,

India was ranked fourth in terms of economic growth

Indija je rangirala četvrta po ekonomskom rastu

among emerging economies.

među rastućim ekonomijama.

This is a very impressive record indeed.

Ovo je vrlo impresivan podatak.

Let's think about the future:

Razmislimo o budućnosti:

the dragon vis-a-vis the elephant.

zmaj naspram slona.

Which country has the growth momentum?

Koja zemlja ima rastući momentum?

China, I believe, still has

Kina, vjerujem, još uvijek ima

some of the excellent raw fundamentals --

neke od odličnih sirovih osnova --

mostly the social capital,

poput društvenog kapitala,

the public health,

javnog zdravstva,

the sense of egalitarianism

i osjećaja egalitarizma

that you don't find in India.

koji ne nalazite u Indiji.

But I believe that India has the momentum.

No vjerujem da Indija ima taj momentum.

It has the improving fundamentals.

Ima poboljšane osnove.

The government has invested in basic education,

Vlada je uložila u osnovnu edukaciju,

has invested in basic health.

u osnovno zdravstvo.

I believe the government should do more,

Vjerujem da vlada treba više napraviti,

but nevertheless, the direction it is moving in

ali smjer kojim ide

is the right direction.

je pravi smjer.

India has the right institutional conditions

Indija ima prave institucionalne uvjete

for economic growth,

za ekonomski rast,

whereas China is still struggling

dok se Kina još uvijek muči

with political reforms.

s političkim reformama.

I believe that the political reforms are a must for China

Vjerujem kako su političke reforme imperativ za Kinu

to maintain its growth.

kako bi održala svoj rast.

And it's very important to have political reforms,

Vrlo je važno imati političke reforme,

to have widely shared benefits of economic growth.

imati široko raspodijeljene beneficije ekonomskog rasta.

I don't know whether that's going to happen or not,

Ne znam hoće li se to dogoditi ili ne

but I'm an optimist.

ali sam optimist.

Hopefully, five years from now, I'm going to report to TEDGlobal

Ako Bog da, za pet godina ću se javiti TEDGlobalu

that political reforms will happen in China.

kako će se političke reforme u Kini i dogoditi.

Thank you very much.

Puno vam hvala.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)