Kerala’s development model, often celebrated as a pioneering example of social justice-oriented growth, stands at a critical juncture as the global system undergoes profound transformations. Historically, Kerala’s unique path of progress has been tied up in human development indicators such as education, health, and social equity, achieved through land reforms, grassroots mobilization, and participatory governance. Yet, these achievements have unfolded against the backdrop of a global system shaped by shifting economic paradigms, geopolitical tensions, and ideological battles.
Today, the rise of conservative nationalism, the erosion of liberal democratic values, and the climate crisis are reshaping the world-system, presenting significant challenges for regions like Kerala that depend on external knowledge-based economies. Neoliberal globalism, which once dominated international economic policy, has given way to state-supported capitalist competition and autocratization, with conservative nationalism acting as both a symptom and a driver of these trends. For Kerala, navigating these challenges requires not just resilience but also innovation in its developmental strategies.
As the pressures of globalization intersect with local dynamics, Kerala faces questions that are often raised globally: How can social-democratic governance models adapt to a world increasingly dominated by polarized politics and economic inequities? What lessons can Kerala draw from its own history and from comparative experiences elsewhere? And how can it reclaim its leadership role as a beacon of inclusive, sustainable development in an era of growing uncertainty?
These questions formed the crux of the 2024 Immanuel Wallerstein Memorial Lecture, where Olle Törnquist, Professor Emeritus at the University of Oslo, offered a compelling analysis of Kerala’s development challenges in a comparative perspective at the Inter University Centre for Social Science Research and Extension (IUCSSRE), Mahatma Gandhi University (MGU), Kottayam. By situating Kerala within broader global trends, Törnquist underscored the interconnectedness of local and global forces and the urgent need for innovative approaches to address the crises of our time. Titled “Challenges of Kerala’s Social Democratic-Oriented Development in Comparative Perspective,” the lecture examined the historical evolution, stagnation, and reinvention of Kerala’s development framework. Törnquist situated these challenges within global dynamics, particularly the rise of conservative nationalism, and proposed a roadmap for renewed progress.
Conservative Nationalism and Global Crises
Törnquist began by identifying the global rise of conservative nationalism as a critical threat to modernity, liberal democracy, and knowledge-based development. This, he argued, is not limited to figures like Vladimir Putin but represents a global tendency, including in India. “Putin cannot be fought only by resisting his invasion of Ukraine,” Törnquist asserted. “He, and others of his kind, must be fought internationally, just as colonialism was.”
He contended that conservative nationalism cannot be countered by defending the aging Western liberal world order, as elements of this order have contributed to its rise. Neoliberal globalism has given way to state-supported capitalism and oligarch competition, accompanied by creeping autocratization. This dynamic undermines development, economic dynamics, and global regulatory frameworks, including those of the United Nations. For a state like Kerala, whose economy and society are closely tied to external knowledge-based development, such disruptions pose significant challenges.
The Evolution of Kerala’s Social Democratic Model
Kerala’s development model has long been celebrated for its emphasis on human development through land reforms, investments in education, and a strong public health system. Törnquist highlighted these achievements, which positioned Kerala as a global example of equitable growth. However, he critiqued the stagnation of this model since the 1960s, citing the insufficient democratization of education, the exclusion of vulnerable populations in land reforms, and the failure to sustain productive investments. The benefits of the model often accrued to individuals rather than being reinvested into the system, limiting its long-term sustainability.
Kerala’s reliance on remittances further masked the growing inequalities and weakened its tax base, aligning uncomfortably with India’s neoliberal economic trends from the 1980s onward. Despite these challenges, Törnquist noted that participatory local governance initiatives since the 1980s provided a renewed framework for development. The 1994-96 period marked a significant attempt to combine local participation with state-level planning, transferring substantial resources to local institutions. This framework demonstrated the potential for scaling up participatory democracy and integrating it with representative governance.
Comparative Insights and Lessons
Drawing on experiences from other regions, Törnquist emphasized the importance of linking participatory democracy with representative structures to overcome fragmented interest-based movements. He pointed to Indonesia’s public health reforms, Brazil’s regional forums, and the historical social-democratic practices of Scandinavia as valuable examples. These cases demonstrated how stable public-labour-capital relations and broad alliances could support reform packages and ensure their implementation.
One innovative suggestion involved fostering employee-owned and managed firms in strategic sectors, democratizing the economy, and increasing labour’s share of profits. Such models could address Kerala’s fiscal constraints, stimulate investment, and create sustainable growth. Törnquist also advocated for compensating the shrinking tax base by requiring facilitated firms to contribute to societal funds with broader stakeholder representation.
The Challenge of Sustaining Progress
While Törnquist acknowledged Kerala’s ability to innovate through participatory governance, he noted persistent challenges in sustaining these efforts. These included unclear links between direct and representative democracy, insufficient coordination between state and local economic dynamics, and unresolved issues related to middle-class and youth inclusion. The political-party hijacking of decentralization efforts in the early 2000s further hampered the momentum generated in the 1990s.
Institutional reforms since 2016, particularly in response to crises like floods and the pandemic, demonstrated the potential of coordinated governance. These efforts stabilized local participatory governance and linked it with state welfare measures. Initiatives like the Kerala Infrastructure Investment Fund Board (KIIFB) provided new resources for broadly defined infrastructure, attracting private investment and strengthening knowledge-based development. However, Törnquist observed that these gains were not sufficiently connected with broader developmental efforts, and the dynamism of the earlier period was not fully reinvented.
Toward a Renewed Vision for Kerala
Törnquist concluded with a call for a renewed critical mass to address Kerala’s development challenges. He proposed scaling up participatory democracy, fostering strategic partnerships between state and private actors, and integrating local and global economic dynamics. He also emphasized the importance of international cooperation, particularly in mission-driven sectors like green technology, as an alternative to the global autocratic competition that fuels conservative nationalism.
Kerala’s future, he argued, lies in developing a democratic alternative to authoritarian developmental models. Drawing inspiration from comparative experiences and Wallerstein’s vision of global solidarity, Törnquist advocated for broad alliances that integrate public discourse, policy reforms, and grassroots mobilization. “Kerala,” Törnquist concluded, “must once again lead by example, demonstrating that social justice, democratic governance, and inclusive growth are not just ideals but achievable realities in an increasingly polarized world.”
C.T. Aravindakumar, Vice-Chancellor of MGU, Michael Tharakan, former Vice-Chancellor of Kannur University, K.M. Seethi, Director, IUCSSRE, Mathew Kurian, Joint Director, KN Raj School of Economics, A.M. Thomas, Jos Chathukulam, Rajesh Komath and Joby Mathew, Harikrishnan, Dinoop, and others spoke at the function.
Professor Immanuel Wallerstein (1930–2019) was an internationally renowned sociologist and economic historian, celebrated for his development of world-systems theory. His groundbreaking ideas transcended academia, shaping global discussions on globalization, social justice, and geopolitics.
