India’s Shift Toward Crony Capitalism Post-2014: A Growing Concern with Examples
Since 2014, India has seen rapid economic development and growth, yet there are growing concerns that crony capitalism is taking root. Crony capitalism refers to a system where the success of businesses is largely dependent on close ties between business leaders and government officials, rather than fair competition. This system leads to a concentration of wealth, undermines democratic institutions, suppresses innovation, and fuels inequality. Below are detailed examples from various sectors of the Indian economy post-2014, illustrating how crony capitalism has manifested.
1. Concentration of Wealth
Post-2014, the wealth of a few large business conglomerates has increased significantly, often due to preferential treatment from the government.
Adani Group: Since 2014, the Adani Group, led by Gautam Adani, has expanded exponentially across sectors like energy, ports, and infrastructure. The group’s meteoric rise has been accompanied by allegations of receiving favorable treatment from the government. For example, the Adani Group won a contract to manage six airports, including key ones like Ahmedabad and Mangalore, even though it had no prior experience in airport management. Critics argue that the government relaxed the rules to allow companies without prior experience to bid, thereby favoring Adani. This allowed Adani to dominate India’s airport infrastructure, raising concerns about monopolistic practices and political favoritism.
Reliance Industries (Mukesh Ambani): Another major player whose wealth has significantly concentrated post-2014 is Reliance Industries, especially through its telecommunications arm, Reliance Jio. Since its launch in 2016, Jio has dominated the Indian telecom market. Critics allege that Jio received preferential treatment in terms of regulatory leniency. The company was allowed to offer free data and voice services for an extended period, which put significant pressure on competitors like Bharti Airtel and Vodafone-Idea. Jio's rapid growth coincided with policies that seemed to disproportionately benefit it, such as favorable spectrum pricing and relaxed norms for extending free services.
2. Preferential Treatment and Policy Favoritism
Crony capitalism is often evident when specific companies receive preferential treatment through policy changes, regulatory leniency, or favorable government contracts.
Telecom Sector and Reliance Jio: Reliance Jio’s entry into the telecom sector in 2016 and its subsequent dominance is a prime example of preferential treatment. The company’s initial offering of free voice and data services for almost six months was unprecedented and shook the telecom industry. While such offers are typically limited by regulatory bodies like the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Jio was able to extend its free services multiple times. This caused competitors like Airtel, Vodafone, and Idea to incur massive losses. Critics argue that the regulatory environment was softened in Jio’s favor, leading to its monopoly-like status in the sector. The consolidation of the telecom industry, with many players exiting the market, raised concerns about the government’s role in facilitating Jio's dominance.
Sahara and SEBI: The Sahara India Pariwar has been under the scanner of SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) for financial irregularities. Despite several court orders, Sahara has been accused of delaying payments to its investors. The company's operations post-2014 indicate that it may have benefited from political backing, allowing it to continue operating without immediate repercussions. Even though SEBI took some actions, Sahara managed to delay the legal proceedings for years, leading many to believe that political connections allowed them to sidestep stricter regulatory enforcement.
3. Corruption and Policy Manipulation
Crony capitalism often manifests through corruption, where businesses manipulate policies in their favor with the help of political connections, leading to huge public losses.
Coal Mining and Adani Enterprises: Post-2014, Adani Enterprises has been a major beneficiary of coal mining contracts. In 2019, Adani received mining leases for coal blocks in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh without competitive bidding, raising concerns about favoritism. The company’s involvement in coal mining projects, particularly in the controversial Carmichael coal mine in Australia, also raised questions about how it secured funding and government support for environmentally and politically sensitive projects. The government’s decision to allocate coal blocks without auctions to politically connected companies like Adani stirred accusations of cronyism.
Commonwealth Games Village Project: Although this scandal predates 2014, the aftermath post-2014 highlights crony capitalism at work. The project saw contracts awarded to developers and contractors who were closely connected to political figures. The developers responsible for constructing the Commonwealth Games Village received favorable land deals and relaxed regulations, which allowed them to acquire prime land at below-market rates. Despite investigations into corruption, many of the involved parties continued to operate without significant penalties, demonstrating how political connections can protect businesses from accountability.
4. Erosion of Democratic Institutions
The influence of big business on political decision-making weakens the independence of democratic institutions like regulatory bodies and the judiciary.
Rafale Deal and Reliance Defense: The 2016 Rafale fighter jet deal between India and France became a major controversy when it was revealed that Reliance Defense, a company owned by Anil Ambani, was selected as an offset partner for Dassault Aviation (the maker of Rafale jets). Critics argue that Reliance Defense, which had no prior experience in defense manufacturing, was chosen because of Ambani’s close ties with political leaders. The controversy highlighted concerns about how government decisions on defense procurement were influenced by business interests, potentially compromising the fairness of the process.
IL&FS Crisis: The Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services (IL&FS) crisis of 2018 revealed how crony capitalism can weaken financial institutions. IL&FS, a key player in financing infrastructure projects, collapsed under the weight of $12 billion in debt. Despite regulatory oversight, the company had been allowed to accumulate unsustainable levels of debt. Investigations into IL&FS revealed that the company had close ties with political figures, which allowed it to bypass regulatory scrutiny for years. The collapse of IL&FS caused significant disruptions in the financial sector, leading to questions about the effectiveness of regulatory bodies like the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in preventing such crises.
5. Impact on Innovation and Small Businesses
Crony capitalism suppresses innovation and competition, as smaller companies find it hard to compete against larger corporations with political connections.
Solar Energy Sector: Since 2014, large conglomerates like Adani and Tata Power have dominated the renewable energy sector, particularly solar energy. While India’s solar energy market has grown significantly, smaller companies and startups face significant barriers in securing contracts and financing. In 2018, the government awarded a large portion of solar energy projects to companies like Adani, raising concerns that smaller, innovative firms were being sidelined. These large firms have leveraged their political connections to secure key projects, making it difficult for smaller players to compete on an equal footing.
Real Estate and Land Acquisition: In states like Maharashtra, large real estate developers have been able to acquire land at preferential rates, while smaller developers and individual entrepreneurs struggle. In 2017, a land acquisition deal in Mumbai allowed a politically connected developer to acquire a prime piece of land at significantly below-market rates. The deal was seen as an example of crony capitalism, where government regulations were relaxed to benefit a few large players. This type of favoritism limits opportunities for smaller developers and stifles competition in the real estate sector.
6. Rising Inequality
Crony capitalism often leads to an unequal distribution of wealth, as politically connected businesses amass wealth at a disproportionate rate, leaving behind the rest of the population.
Inequality in Wealth Distribution: Since 2014, India has seen a significant rise in economic inequality. According to an Oxfam report, the wealthiest 1% of Indians now own over 40% of the country’s wealth, a trend exacerbated by crony capitalism. Business tycoons like Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani have seen their wealth multiply, while a large portion of the population continues to struggle with unemployment and poverty. The growing wealth disparity reflects the influence of politically connected businesses that have used their relationships with the government to secure favorable contracts, resources, and market advantages.
Real Estate Inequality in Urban Centers: In cities like Mumbai, Delhi, and Bengaluru, politically connected real estate developers have amassed vast tracts of prime urban land. For example, in 2016, a developer with close ties to the ruling political party acquired land in Mumbai’s Bandra-Kurla Complex at a fraction of the market value. This kind of cronyism has contributed to skyrocketing real estate prices, making housing unaffordable for middle- and lower-income families. Meanwhile, large developers continue to profit from land deals brokered through political connections, deepening the inequality in urban real estate ownership.
Conclusion
India’s shift towards crony capitalism post-2014 has resulted in a concentration of wealth, policy manipulation, and rising inequality. From the rise of the Adani Group and Reliance Jio to the controversies surrounding the Rafale deal and IL&FS crisis, it’s evident that political favoritism is distorting the market. This system stifles competition, undermines democratic institutions, and limits opportunities for smaller businesses, ultimately threatening India’s long-term economic stability. To ensure a fair and competitive market, India must strengthen regulatory oversight, promote transparency, and reduce the influence of political favoritism in business.
Bmbkrr