Interrogating inclusive growth: formal-informal duality, complementarity, conflict
通过分析印度各邦和行业数据，发现城市非正规部门受正规部门影响，而农村非正规部门仅与农业相关；正规部门扩张导致资源从农业和农村非正规部门流失，但城市非正规部门可能因生产率优势而扩张，从而暴露城乡非正规部门间的冲突，质疑包容性增长范式。
I find through analyses of across-state, across-industry-over-state and pooled data (involving state and time) on the Indian economy that the behaviour of the urban informal/unorganised sector is explained by the modern formal/organised sector besides petty agriculture, but the vast rural informal sector is like 'surplus population', associated only with petty agriculture. I also show there could be interactions between the formal sector and modern agriculture. These empirical relations are analysed and theoretical departures from the literature are identified. I propose using a Structuralist-Kaleckian framework: with accumulation in the formal sector a large part of petty agriculture is modernised or converted to suit the needs of accumulation, and thereby we have a long-run drain of resources from petty agriculture and hence from informal sectors as well. However, even under such a resource drain, the urban informal sector may sustain or expand due to productivity advantages and due to pull from the formal sector, at the cost of its rural counterpart. In the short run when the formal sector and hence the urban informal sector expand or when the government promotes the urban or 'productive' part of informal economy, a basic conflict between urban and rural informal sectors is exposed, given the generic agricultural supply constraint. Thus, the paradigms of 'inclusive growth' and 'development management' are questioned. Copyright , Oxford University Press.