Utsav Kumar
Asian Development Bank
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Utsav Kumar.
Structural Change and Economic Dynamics | 2012
Arnelyn Abdon; Marife Lou Bacate; Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar
We rank 5,107 products and 124 countries according to the Hidalgo and Hausmann (2009) measures of complexity. We find that: (1) the most complex products are in machinery, chemicals, and metals, while the least complex products are raw materials and commodities, wood, textiles, and agricultural products; (2) the most complex economies in the world are Japan, Germany, and Sweden, and the least complex, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, and Nigeria; (3) the major exporters of the more complex products are the high-income countries, while the major exporters of the less complex products are the low-income countries; and (4) export shares of the more complex products increase with income, while export shares of the less complex products decrease with income. Finally, we relate the measure of product complexity with the concept of Complex Products and Systems, and find a high degree of conformity between them.
India Policy Forum | 2009
Poonam Gupta; Rana Hasan; Utsav Kumar
India has undertaken extensive reforms in its manufacturing sector over the last two decades. However, an acceleration of growth in manufacturing, and a corresponding increase in employment, has eluded India. Why have the reforms not produced the intended results? Using Annual Survey of Industries data at the three digit level for major Indian states, for 1980-2004, we analyze the effects of the reforms that liberalized Indias industrial licensing regime on the performance of registered manufacturing. We find that the performance of the manufacturing sector is heterogeneous across states, as well as across industries. In particular, labor intensive industries and industries dependent on infrastructure have not benefited much from reforms. Industrial performance appears to be contingent on the state specific policy and economic environment. States with relatively inflexible labor regulations have experienced slower growth of labor-intensive industries and slower employment growth overall. Additionally, states with relatively competitive product market regulations and with better infrastructure have experienced larger benefits from reforms.
Archive | 2008
Poonam Gupta; Rana Hasan; Utsav Kumar
India has undertaken extensive reforms in its manufacturing sector in the last two decades. However, an acceleration of growth in manufacturing, and a concomitant increase in employment, has eluded India. What might be holding the sector back? Using Annual Survey of Industries data at the three-digit level and difference in estimates this paper finds that the post-reform performance of the manufacturing sector is heterogeneous across industries. In particular, industries dependent on infrastructure or external finance, and labour-intensive industries have not been able to reap the maximum benefits of reforms. The results point to the importance of infrastructure development and financial sector development for the manufacturing sector’s growth to accelerate further. They also emphasize the need to clearly identify and address the factors inhibiting the growth of labour-intensive industries.
Eastern European Economics | 2012
Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar
With a decrease in formal trade barriers, trade facilitation has come into prominence as a policy tool for promoting trade. In this paper, we use a gravity model to examine the relationship between bilateral trade flows and trade facilitation. We also estimate the gains in trade derived from improvements in trade facilitation for the Central Asian countries. Trade facilitation is measured through the World Bank’s Logistic Performance Index (LPI). Our results show that there are significant gains in trade as a result of improving trade facilitation in these countries. These gains in trade vary from 28 percent in the case of Azerbaijan to as much as 63 percent in the case of Tajikistan. Furthermore, intraregional trade increases by 100 percent. Among the different components of LPI, we find that the greatest increase in total trade comes from improvement in infrastructure, followed by logistics and efficiency of customs and other border agencies. Also, our results show that the increase in bilateral trade, due to an improvement in the exporting country’s LPI, in highly sophisticated, more differentiated, and high-technology products is greater than the increase in trade in less sophisticated, less differentiated, and low-technology products. This is particularly important for the Central Asian countries as they try to reduce their dependence on exports of natural resources and diversify their manufacturing base by shifting to more sophisticated goods. As they look for markets beyond their borders, trade facilitation will have an important role to play.
Oxford Development Studies | 2014
Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar; Arnelyn Abdon
We develop an Index of Opportunities for 130 countries based on their capabilities to undergo structural transformation. The Index of Opportunities has four dimensions, all of them characteristic of a country’s export basket: (1) sophistication; (2) diversification; (3) standardness; and (4) possibilities for exporting with comparative advantage over other products. The rationale underlying the index is that, in the long run, a country’s income is determined by the variety and sophistication of the products it makes and exports, which reflect its accumulated capabilities. We find that countries like China, India, Poland, Thailand, Mexico, and Brazil have accumulated a significant number of capabilities that will allow them to do well in the long run. These countries have diversified and increased the level of sophistication of their export structures. At the other extreme, countries like Papua New Guinea, Malawi, Benin, Mauritania, and Haiti score very poorly in the Index of Opportunities because their export structures are neither diversified nor sophisticated, and they have accumulated very few and unsophisticated capabilities. These countries are in urgent need of implementing policies that lead to the accumulation of capabilities.
MPRA Paper | 2010
Poonam Gupta; Utsav Kumar
Many emerging countries in recent decades have relied on a development strategy that focused primarily on promoting the manufacturing sector and the exports of manufactured goods. However, an acceleration of growth of output and employment in manufacturing has eluded India. This is despite the fact that the central focus of the reforms in the 1980s and 1990s was to unshackle the manufacturing sector. Instead it is the services sector which has grown rapidly, contributing about two-third of GDP growth in recent years. This paper discusses the reasons behind the modest performance of the manufacturing sector in India post reforms. It argues that there are many factors that have inhibited the growth of industrial sector in India. One major factor is the rigid and strict labor laws which have affected the industrial performance in a number of ways, by keeping the size of the establishments small, by not encouraging the production of labor intensive goods, by pushing activities to the unorganized sector, and by keeping the Indian industry uncompetitive. Besides the labor laws other factors that are responsible for the modest performance of the manufacturing sector include difficulty in the acquisition of land for industrial use, inadequate financing and infrastructure, and cumbersome business climate. The paper presents arguments and evidence which shows the importance of these factors.
Journal of The Asia Pacific Economy | 2017
Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar; Reynold Galope
During the last few years, the newly coined term middle-income trap has been widely used by policymakers to refer to the middle-income economies that seem to be stuck in the middle-income range. However, there is no accepted definition of the term in the literature. In this paper, we study historical transitions across income groups to see whether there is any evidence that supports the claim that economies do not advance. Overall, the data rejects this proposition. Instead, we argue that what distinguishes economies in their transition from middle to high income is fast versus slow transitions. We find that, historically, it has taken a “typical” economy 55 years to graduate from lower-middle income (
Japan and the World Economy | 2014
Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar; Arnelyn Abdon
2,000 in 1990 purchasing power parity [PPP]
Archive | 2010
Jesus Felipe; Utsav Kumar
) to upper-middle income (
Archive | 2011
Utsav Kumar; Arvind Subramanian
7,250 in 1990 PPP