Let's be a bit more selective in using the word 'reforms'

Everybody should take a beat and think before uttering the word ‘reforms’ the next time. Glib usage, frequently in the wrong context, threatens to rob the word of its import.

- RAJRISHI SINGHAL

The term ‘reforms’ became a permanent fixture of the universal policy lexicon during the early 90s, when, after the fall of Berlin Wall and breakup of the Soviet Union, there was a sweeping economic policy overhaul in parts of East Europe, Asia, Africa and South America. The changes implemented had a common thread running through them, with some variations in the degree of implementation across individual nations; the focus was primarily on reducing the role of government in business, relaxing cross-border investment rules and transferring state-run enterprises from public to private ownership. Thereafter, the word ‘reforms’ has become a placeholder to denote any and all changes. Much like its universal acceptance, there is widespread misapplication as well.

India is not immune to this affliction. The term's random and frequent use seems to be diluting its meaning. In fact, it is now often employed as an external stimulus in the hope of generating a spontaneous, positive response from market operators and media platforms. This is typically seen around times of economic despondency and, interestingly, the use of ‘reforms’ almost always manages to elicit a favourable response from the target audience. This reflexive response to the word has become a bit too predictable.