Economic Survey 2026: A Missed Opportunity for Honest Policy Critique
Economic Surveys, prepared under the guidance of the Chief Economic Advisor, serve as crucial documents intended to inform policymakers, business leaders, and citizens about the government's economic role. They are expected to provide a fair assessment of economic performance, diagnose key issues with suggested solutions, and offer honest critiques of budget outcomes for course-correction. However, the latest Economic Survey 2025-26 (ES-26) has drawn criticism for being too arcane and lacking in analytical depth, particularly in its failure to examine government policy failures.
Historical Context and Approaches of Economic Surveys
Over the years, different Chief Economic Advisors have adopted varying approaches to these surveys. Arvind Subramanian introduced a critical volume on major issues, which was discontinued after his departure. Krishnamurthy Subramanian's surveys tended to echo government narratives with limited objective analysis. In contrast, V Anantha Nageswaran's surveys, including ES-26 as his fourth, have been more balanced, though often portraying the government in a favorable light. ES-26 reviews economic performance and discusses strategies like Swadeshi/import substitution, input cost reduction, and strategic indispensability in a fractured world.
GDP Growth Projections and Underlying Concerns
ES-26 projects GDP growth between 6.8% and 7.2% for the upcoming year, following an estimated 7.4% growth in 2025-26. While this appears positive on the surface, a deeper look reveals troubling aspects. Nominal GDP growth is estimated at just 8%, with the rupee depreciating by over 6.5%. This results in a dollar GDP growth of only 1.5%, among the lowest globally, despite India having high real GDP growth. Nageswaran dismisses rupee depreciation as a "wrinkle in the ointment", attributing it to geopolitics and strategic power gaps, without adequately addressing the implications for India's goal of becoming the third-largest economy.
Lack of Analysis on Policy and Programme Failures
Despite emphasizing the importance of learning from failures in Chapter 16, ES-26 fails to analyze any specific government policy or programme failures. For instance, employment-linked incentive schemes announced in the 2024-25 Budget aimed to create over 2 crore jobs, but an ambitious internship scheme has seen less than 10,000 participants in 18 months, indicating poor implementation. Similarly, manufacturing remains stagnant at 12-13% despite initiatives like Make In India and production-linked incentives (PLIs). The survey praises PLIs without explaining why disbursements are below 10% after four years or why key sectors like ACC batteries and IT hardware have seen delays.
Fiscal Performance and Opaque Advice
The government's fiscal performance faced stress in 2025-26 due to policies like tax-free incomes up to Rs 12 lakh and GST rate reductions. ES-26 describes fiscal issues at length but offers no insights on tougher challenges. Last year, Nageswaran advised opening up Chinese investment in areas like solar cells, but this was ignored. This year, similar advice is couched in arcane language, such as moving from import substitution to strategic indispensability, making it easier to overlook. This lack of clarity and actionable critique risks rendering the survey as mere shelf decoration rather than a tool for meaningful discussion.
In summary, while ES-26 provides growth projections and discusses strategic issues, its failure to critically analyze failures in employment schemes, manufacturing, and fiscal management limits its utility for informed policymaking and public discourse.
