This note was published in Mathrubhumi on 16/08/2022
On July 26th, a solemn function was held jointly by Centre for Socio Economic and Environmental Studies (CSES), Kochi along with Gulati Institute of Finance and Taxation (GIFT), Thirvananthapuram at the Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT) Senate Hall to felicitate Prof K K George, the economist and noted expert in Public Finance. The autobiography of Prof George, entitled ‘A Journal of My Life’ was released by economist and former Finance Minister Dr T M Thomas Issac on the occasion. The function Chaired by Prof Michael Tharakan, Chairman of Kerala Council for Historical Research was attended by Minister of Industries P Rajeev, Vice Chancellor of CUSAT, present Director of GIFT, opinion leaders, family members, friends and former colleagues of Prof George and large cross section of the general public. There was mood of celebration particularly during the photo session that followed the event.
Exactly after 16 days, on July 11, George sailed gently into that good night. For the past few years, George was living with multiple morbidities and had been holding on delicately. A lung infection caused the final end. The large cross section of society present at his funeral indicated the love and affection that people had for George. This included the office bearers of his residents association to the fish vendor and the person who was supplying him provisions.
Researchers and academics usually live in a rarefied atmosphere as they view issues in abstraction, beyond the horizon of ‘real existence’. Here was a social scientist who moved closely with people around from who he was trying to learn something. George was much more than that. He was a rigorous researcher, an excellent teacher, a research guide, a mentor to his juniors including myself and above and over a humanist holding the values of intellectual sincerity. The felicitation that he received reflected the person that he was. Here, I am attempting to draw a picture of that person that he was. Here, I am attempting to draw a picture of that person.
George came from a different mould. He had started his career as a Probationary Officer of the State Bank of India. He had worked as a Field Officer, and officer in the foreign exchange department before being posted at the Economic and Statistical Research Department of the bank at its corporate headquarters in Mumbai. It was a seven year long innings, and his baptism to economic research took place there. His attention fell on centre -state financial relations. While writing articles mainly in economic newspapers on this topic, he used the pen name ’K Kolanjiyil’ to hide is identity as a serving officer in a public sector bank. These articles were short, with limited research content and explored different aspects of the theme like fiscal, plan and non-plan transfers. Like little drops of water making the mighty ocean, these articles eventually opened new vistas – into George leaving the State Bank of India and joining the CUSAT as a Reader in the School of Management Studies from which he retired as the Director. He completed his doctoral studies in centre- state financial relations. He was later awarded Fulbright Fellowship at the University of Maryland, US, and later Fellowship of the Lalbahadur Shastri Indo Canadian Institute at Halifax, Canada. At the time of his passing, he was Chairman of CSES a non- governmental research institution focusing mainly on empirical research.
Prof George was a member of the Advisory Board of Kerala State Planning Board. He was also a Member of Working Group on Expenditure Policy. He was Reserve Bank of India nominee to the Board of Directors of Federal Bank and Parur Central Cooperative Bank. He was a member of the Syndicate and Academic Council of the CUSAT.
He is an author of articles in several research journals like the Economic and Political Weekly. These were in the areas of centre-state finance relations, trends in Kerala State finances, Kerala Model of Development and issues on Kerala’s education.
The prime contribution that George made as an economist was in attempting to quantify centre- state flow of funds. George was not a statistician or a quantitative economist, but he could always interpret figures, be it time series or in the form of matrix and come to critical conclusions. Relying on development/backwardness index, he quantified the extent of funds that developed states cornered. This attempt towards quantification of funds flow was not made by scholars earlier. That the developed regions or states could get more funds from the Central Government or from other channels is obvious. But the type of quantification that George made could lead to policy interventions. That will also lead to discussions on the nature of the State. Can a federal system that ensures constitutionally the flow adequate funds to less or least developed regions or states ensure better distributional justice? George steered clear of this discussion which he felt was in the domain of Political Science and Public Administration, leaving it to specialists in those subjects.
Another important contribution of Prof George related to what is often described as Kerala Model of Development. Many Indian and foreign economists like Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen has applauded this model. According to the traditional paradigms of development, social development follows economic development. From the beginning of the 20th century, Kerala had achieved higher level of social development compared to most other Indian states. This achievement is reflected through higher literacy, life expectancy and lower infant mortality rates. This social achievement was not preceded by growth in agricultural, industrial or tertiary sectors. This social development happened through policy interventions of government. George’s book ‘Limits to Kerala Model of Development’ questioned the sustainability of this model and indicated that in several areas in social development Kerala is not progressing but is actually regressing. This enquiry has considerable contemporary relevance. Successive governments in Kerala have been trying to grapple the problem of increasing budgetary deficit. George’s argument was that in order to sustain the social achievements the state should focus on higher level of economic development. The issues that George raised appear to be having a prophetic quality. He was ahead of times.
No economist or specialist in public fiancé can be politically neutral. Economics is essentially political economy. What was George’s position? In his youth under the influence of a trade union leader J F Kurian, George was attracted to Kerala Socialist Party which was demanding regional autonomy. Later, while at the E & S R Department, he was drawn to Radical Humanism. During the Emergency years 1975-77 he supported the movement initiated by Jayaprakash Narayan. In SBI during 1960s, trade unions had become so powerful that they called the shots. On a few occasions, George showed the courage to challenge them as he did with the Shiva Sena in Mumbai later. While at the CDS, the contacts and friendship that George had with some Naxalite leaders brought ire from CDS administration. George was a rebel. His political perspective appears to be eclectic to me. But, in the current political context, George was closer to the LDF than the UDF. He could be critical left thinker.
George was an environmental activist and participated in environmental initiatives. He was part of the Save Silent Valley movement against the construction of a hydro electric project in the rainforest known as Silent Valley. This movement was successful and finally the government had to abandon it. He was active in the movement against setting up of a nuclear power plant at Bhoodathankettu, not far from Aluva where he was residing. This movement also ended as success and the government was forced to abandon that project. Another one was his participation in Save Periyar campaign. This movement received mixed response. The river Periyar on the banks of which George lived continues to remain heavily polluted.
There is a magnetic part in the personality of George. His students always remained fond of him. He also kept in touch with them. He was a mentor to a large number of junior scholars myself being one of them. He was an exacting research guide who brought the best from his students. Here is a great, good and lovable human being.