{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014411027568922305, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010025062656641603, 'mean_word_length': 5.413654618473895, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
India: The Political Economy of Growth, Stagnation and the State, 1951–2000

standards from the WTO; and a reversion to multilateral trade instruments rather than the current preference for regional trading arrangements that may actually worsen rather than improve the situation of the least-developed countries. Many of these recommendations are valid and demand deeper consideration although it is arguable whether they are always the natural outcome of the discussion and analysis in the preceding chapters. This brief monograph is a disappointment in that it falls rather short of its worthy intentions. Of some 127 pages of text, the core chapter on Trade Growth and Poverty Reduction draws heavily on a previously published journal article such that there are only around 60 pages of original discussion and analysis, including 14 pages of recommendations. Srinivasan partly succeeds in addressing the relationship between trade, growth and poverty-reduction, notably in Chapter 2 but his cursory surveys of theoretical and empirical literature fail to capture the full intricacies of the key issues and debates. This is not to denigrate the validity of his interesting and provocative recommendations but rather that they lack sufficient justification. Further, the links between chapters, sections and arguments are not fully realised, such that it is the dissonances rather than the underlying themes that attract most notice. Those seeking a substantive discussion of the specific issues confronting land-locked countries will also be disappointed since they merit virtually no mention.