WEBINAR RECORDING · 2025-03
India's Trade Policy in the 21st Century
In this conversation: Amita Batra; discussant Amrita Saha; moderators Ben Shepherd and Hanna Norberg.
Amita Batra argues that India’s merchandise-trade strategy has not sufficiently adapted to cross-border production. Amrita Saha adds domestic political economy and unequal regional exposure. The discussion links inputs, investment and agreement depth to employment, upgrading and livelihood concerns.
Session information draws on the recording and its original description. Affiliations and policy context refer to the time of the webinar.
FROM THE CONVERSATION
Three takeaways.
What they mean in practice.
Prepared from the session recording using automatic transcription and editorial review. Follow the timestamp links for the original wording and context.
Export competitiveness depends on imported inputs
Watch 12:09 ↗Batra contrasts India with East and Southeast Asian participation in component trade, emphasizing input-tariff preferences and investment openness. Asked how Make in India fits with self-reliance, she argues that production for world markets requires efficient inputs and investment while domestic technological capability remains legitimate.
Policy interpretation: Assess input restrictions and domestic-content ambitions against exporting firms’ needs, rather than treating imports and capacity as opposites.
FTA strategy extends beyond tariff bargains
Watch 19:09 ↗Batra links earlier hesitation to tariff negotiations, bilateral deficits and a preference for multilateralism. She argues that investment rules, regulatory alignment and environmental and labor provisions increasingly shape meaningful agreements. Signing more agreements without depth may leave production opportunities unrealized.
Policy interpretation: Evaluate implementation and regulatory content alongside access; bilateral deficits are not a complete success measure.
National outcomes can conceal concentrated losses
Watch 35:24 ↗Saha emphasizes business interests and state-level differences. Describing research on US preference withdrawal in 2019, she reports concentrated sectoral and regional effects, including lower-skilled urban workers. In Q&A she cautions that technological change prevents manufacturing growth translating mechanically into jobs.
Policy interpretation: Connect trade to disaggregated labor-market and household evidence, coordinating national strategy with state conditions.
From the discussion
Asked what could build reform momentum (53:50), Batra proposes explaining efficiency and technological gains while recognizing livelihood and food-security concerns in agriculture and dairy (56:42–59:01). Saha calls for higher-frequency distributional evidence (54:25). Reform needs commercial credibility and political accommodation.
