????印度實施自由市場改革的歷史性機遇給投資者和經濟分析人士帶來了令人興奮的遐想，但真正讓所有人熱情高漲的應該是這個國家擁有重新定義資本主義的獨特機會。隨著納倫德拉?莫迪成為新任總理，印度已經為建設自己的資本主義做好了準備，這種資本主義將滿足這個世界上最大的民主國家的復雜需求，從而打造真正的現代化經濟。

????和更成熟也更穩固的美國經濟不同，印度經濟剛剛成形。原因是，在過去幾十年中，金融和政治失誤一直讓印度深陷于準商業主義、效率低下、腐敗和不均衡發展構成的泥沼之中。雖然印度政府在20世紀90年代放松了金融監管，但農業和煤炭等關鍵行業仍然受到政府的控制。印度對外資也有限制，造成急需資源匱乏，從而削弱了印度的商業潛力。現在，掌握著這些資源的外國投資者就等在印度的國門之外，叫嚷著要進入這個前景光明的新興市場。印度國內的大型企業同樣資金充足，急待發展。

????對印度總理來說，讓上述各方獲得他們所希望的自由、讓市場來決定一切是一件很有誘惑力的事，但也是一招錯棋。治愈印度的經濟痼疾并不一定要解除所有的投資和經營活動限制。印度的新法律應該鼓勵盈利、但不是牟取暴利，而且應該要求企業肩負起更多責任。基于這樣的法律，在規劃好的框架內小心地向自由企業打開大門才是印度經濟問題的解決之道。應該鼓勵本國公司和外資企業做出全面改善，包括員工權力、工資水平和環保標準等方面的改善，從而構建出既能盈利、又負責任的經營環境。

????以農業、具體來說是小麥種植為例。目前印度的小麥年產量為9500萬噸。然而，由于缺乏合適的存儲設施，再加上國有企業印度食品公司（Food Corporation of India）管理的運輸系統頗為糟糕，因腐爛變質而損失的小麥幾乎達到22%。這不僅造成供需失衡、提高了部分地區的糧食價格，還導致印度無法擴大小麥出口。今年的降雨量預計將低于正常水平，腐爛變質和管理不善問題可能給占印度GDP 14%的農業帶來更大的壓力。

????值得贊賞的是，莫迪已經承諾要實現農業現代化，改善糧食經銷體系，以期借此創造就業機會，同時遏制已經超過9%的食品通脹。但這些計劃需要投入大量資金，還需要民營行業解決方案的參與，包括來自美國等科技更發達國家的企業。

????在這個問題上莫迪需要小心，他還需要把孟山都（Monsato）的經驗作為今后的指南。這家農業化工和農業生物科技公司的總部設在圣路易斯。1988年，世界銀行（World Bank）迫使印度放寬了對農業的限制，孟山都隨即成為印度種子市場的主要參與者。對一個低效市場來說，出現這樣的情況或許在所難免。然而，這家公司的轉基因種子以及相關專利讓它得以建立起了一個“繳租”體系，繳納租金的都是貧窮的農民。孟山都曾在印度推出適應性更強的新型棉花，稱為Bt棉。農民們原本希望這種新型棉花產生的收益能超過成本，但相關的使用費卻推高了棉花種子的價格。

????很難弄清楚那些冒險種植Bt棉花的農民是否獲得了回報，但有一點很明顯，那就是這種商業模式讓孟山都在一些國家成為眾矢之的。人們指責這樣的商業模式讓當地農民債臺高筑，而且經常引發自殺事件。更不用說Bt棉好壞參半的表現說明，這樣的超級種子也許并不像看上去那樣有利可圖。此外，還有人指責孟山都支付給農業工人，特別是女工的工資低于應有水平，而且還在印度使用童工。

????India’s historic opportunity to institute free market reform has excited the imagination of investors and economic analysts, but what should really enthuse everyone is the nation’s unique chance to redefine capitalism. With the election of new Prime Minister Narendra Modi, it’s positioned to create a brand of capitalism that fits the complex needs of the world’s largest democracy and therefore create a truly modern economy.

????Unlike the more mature, but entrenched U.S. economy, India’s is in its infancy due to decades of financial and political missteps that have mired the nation in a quagmire of quasi-mercantilism, inefficiency, corruption and uneven growth. Despite the loosening of financial regulations in the 1990s, the country has continued to control key industries, such as agriculture and coal. It also places restrictions on foreign investment, which has starved the nation of much needed resources and compromised its business potential. These resources are now waiting at the door in the form of foreign investors clamoring to get in on a promising emerging market, as well as big domestic companies with hefty war chests and a hunger for growth.

????It’s tempting for India’s prime minister to simply give these parties the freedom they want and let the markets do the rest, but that would be a mistake. The answer to India’s economic malaise is not necessarily the lifting of all restrictions on investment and business activity. Rather, it’s a careful opening of the door to free enterprise within a planned framework of new laws that encourage profit-making but not profiteering and which hold businesses to a higher standard of accountability. Both Indian and foreign companies should be encouraged to improve their performance on everything from workers’ rights and wage levels to environmental standards that can create a business environment that is both profitable and responsible.

????Take, for example, the agriculture industry – specifically, wheat. India currently produces 95 tons of wheat a year, but due to lack of proper storage facilities and poor transport systems administered by the government-run Food Corporation of India, almost22% of the wheat is lost to spoilage. This not only creates a supply-demand imbalance and increases food prices for locals, but it also prevents India from being able to export more of its produce. And with rainfallforecast to be lower than usual this year, spoilage and mismanagement could put even more pressure on India’s farming sector, which accounts for 14% of its GDP.

????To his credit, Modi has promised to modernize agriculture and improve the food distribution system in hopes of creating jobs and reining in food inflation of more than 9%. Those plans, however, will require heavy financial investment and the involvement of private sector solutions, including from companies in more technologically advanced nations like the U.S.

????This is where Modi needs to proceed carefully and use the Monsato MON 0.32% experience as a guide for the future. The St. Louis-based agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology company became a major player in the Indian seed market in 1988 when the World Bank forced India to deregulate the sector. It was perhaps an inevitable development for an inefficient market. However, Monsanto’s genetic modification of seeds and patenting of the same also enabled the company to create a system of rent-paying by poor farmers. When the company introduced a new type of cotton engineered to be more resilient, called Bt cotton, to India, the associated royalties raised the price of cotton seeds for farmers who hoped that the benefits of the crop would outweigh the cost.

????It is hard to know whether the gamble paid off for individual farmers, but what is clear is that the company is currently under fire in several countries for this business model, which critics claim puts local farmers into deep debt and often leads to suicides, not to mention that the mixed track record of Bt cotton illustrates that these super seeds may not be as profitable as they seem. What’s more, Monsanto has been accused of paying sub-level wages to agricultural workers, especially women, and using child labor in India.