Industry Odisha Bureau, Sep 04: Former RBI Guv Raghuram Rajan has clarified his position on India’s GDP figures. He said he has neither questioned nor endorsed recent numbers. His broader focus remains on the economy’s growth trajectory. Rajan has repeatedly wondered why strong growth hasn’t lifted investment. Private investment, FDI and job creation remain his central concerns.
Sharing his views on a social networking platform, Rajan addressed circulating clips from a media interview. He wrote he has nothing new to say about GDP. “I have neither questioned nor endorsed them,” he stated clearly. His puzzlement, he explained, concerns broader economic outcomes instead. Why doesn’t strong growth translate into more private investment, he asked.
Rajan distinguished this from questioning specific GDP calculations directly. “That is different from questioning every last number,” he wrote. He said such technical scrutiny belongs to GDP calculation experts. His concern lies with FDI, jobs and investment trends broadly.
India’s real GDP grew 7.8 percent year-on-year in Q1 FY27. This data came from the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation. The figures have drawn attention following a recent base-year revision. Some economists have raised questions about the revised methodology’s implications.
The revision changed how nominal GDP is calculated for comparison. Under the new series, April-June 2025 nominal GDP stood at ₹80 trillion. The previous series had reported this figure as ₹86.05 trillion instead. Some economists have questioned how this revision affects growth interpretation.
India’s statistics ministry addressed these concerns at a press conference. A senior official defended the methodology change as consultation-driven. The shift, implemented in February, aimed to better reflect economic conditions. Officials maintain the new series improves overall data accuracy.
World Bank’s Neelkanth Mishra also weighed in on the debate. He said claims questioning the 7.8% growth figure were incorrect. Mishra argued the new GDP series improved methodology and credibility. He noted the base revision was already known since March.
Using the old base, nominal growth would have been 2.6 percent. This compares with 10.3 percent reported under the current series. However, the government maintains these comparisons aren’t directly equivalent. The two series measure different baseline conditions, officials explained.
Rajan’s broader question ultimately centers on economic outcomes, not GDP data itself. His focus remains on whether growth translates into investment, FDI and jobs. That distinction, he emphasized, differs fundamentally from disputing headline growth figures.
