top of page

By:

Archita Gaur

13 June 2026 at 3:25:13 pm

The Economics of Next-Generation FTAs

While India is rewriting its trade strategy, market access will matter only if domestic industry can turn it into investment, jobs and deeper global value-chain integration. After years of cautiously pursuing Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), India has signed landmark deals with the United Kingdom and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), while talks continue with several other major economies. The move reflects a broader strategy to deepen integration with global markets, attract...

The Economics of Next-Generation FTAs

While India is rewriting its trade strategy, market access will matter only if domestic industry can turn it into investment, jobs and deeper global value-chain integration. After years of cautiously pursuing Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), India has signed landmark deals with the United Kingdom and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), while talks continue with several other major economies. The move reflects a broader strategy to deepen integration with global markets, attract investment, strengthen manufacturing, and diversify supply chains amid growing geopolitical and economic fragmentation. However, the success of these agreements cannot be measured in the number of deals signed or tariffs reduced. Their true value lies in strengthening export competitiveness, increasing participation in global value chains, generating quality employment, and enhancing long-run productivity. This article analyses the economic implications of India’s recent FTAs, the challenges to their effective implementation, and measures needed to maximize their benefits New Strategy India’s recent push towards FTAs marks a shift from its earlier cautious stance to trade liberalization. Concerns over widening trade deficits and impact of imports on domestic industries had earlier made India reluctant to pursue comprehensive FTAs, which was evident from its decision to remain outside the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). However, changing global dynamics, including supply chain disruptions, geopolitical realignments, and the “China+1” strategy, have prompted India to adopt a more proactive trade policy. Recent agreements with the United Kingdom and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) emphasize expanding market access, attracting investment, and integrating more deeply into global value chains. Unlike traditional FTAs, which focus primarily on tariff reductions, India's recent agreements aim to promote deeper economic integration. The India–UK FTA expands market access for goods and services while including provisions on digital trade, intellectual property, government procurement, and mobility of professionals. Similarly, the India–EFTA Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement (TEPA) go beyond trade liberalization by combining tariff concessions with a landmark investment commitment of USD 100 billion over 15 years to support industrial growth and employment generation. These agreements reflect a shift in India’s trade strategy, focusing not just on expanding exports but also on attracting investment, facilitating technology transfer, bolstering supply chains and enhancing competitiveness of local industry. Their success, however, will hinge on strong implementation and competitiveness of domestic industries. Economic Impact Free trade agreements can promote economic growth by reducing trade barriers, expanding market access, and facilitating greater participation in global value chains. For India, recent FTAs are expected to boost exports in textile, pharmaceuticals, engineering goods and services while attracting greater foreign direct investment (FDI) through improved market access and investment provisions. Greater competition can also encourage domestic firms to innovate, improve productivity and achieve economies of scale. However, these gains are not automatic. Labour-intensive industries and MSMEs may struggle to compete with cheaper imports without adequate policy support. Tariff reductions may also lead to short-term revenue losses, while restrictive rules of origin and non-tariff measures may limit the full utilization of trade preferences. Moreover, Indian firms may be unable to fully capitalize on expanded market access without improvements in logistics, infrastructure, and the ease of doing business. Ultimately, the economic success of India’s FTAs will depend not only on the agreements themselves but also on complementary domestic reforms that enhance export competitiveness and strengthen industrial capacity. Although India’s recent FTAs offer significant economic opportunities, realizing their full benefits will depend on effective implementation and complementary domestic reforms. Several structural challenges could constrain the ability of Indian firms to fully capitalize on these agreements. MSMEs are particularly exposed. Many lack the technological capabilities, access to finance and compliance infrastructure required to meet international quality, environmental and sustainability standards. Export-readiness programmes, easier access to credit, technology upgradation and stronger institutional support can therefore be as important as the tariff concessions negotiated abroad. Rules of origin deserve particular attention. They are necessary to prevent trade diversion and ensure that preferential access benefits genuine producers, but excessive complexity can turn an FTA preference into an administrative burden. Simplifying procedures, strengthening customs coordination and making compliance easier for smaller exporters will be essential to improving utilisation. High logistics costs and infrastructure bottlenecks have long weakened India’s export competitiveness. A product that receives zero or low tariffs in a foreign market can still be uncompetitive if it is expensive or slow to move from an Indian factory to a foreign customer. This makes investments in multimodal transport, port modernisation, warehousing, customs digitisation and initiatives such as PM Gati Shakti central to the success of the new trade strategy. Faster clearances and more predictable logistics can effectively create a second layer of competitiveness alongside tariff preferences. The same applies to the broader ease of doing business. Reliable power, faster approvals, access to finance, skilled labour and predictable regulations are not peripheral issues in an FTA strategy. India’s next-generation FTAs represent a strategic shift from tariff-focused liberalisation towards deeper economic integration. They offer an opportunity to expand exports, attract investment, diversify supply chains and strengthen India’s position in global value chains. But the signing of an agreement should be seen as the beginning of the process, not its culmination. The more meaningful measure of success will be whether Indian firms increase their exports, whether new investment creates productive capacity, whether MSMEs enter global supply chains and whether workers gain access to better and more productive employment. (The writer is an economics postgraduate from Jawaharlal Nehru University with research interests in economic policy, trade and global governance. Views personal.)

Cheap Politics

Democracy does not merely test a politician’s ability to win elections. It tests character when applause is easiest to earn through the cheapest of means. Udhayanidhi Stalin, son of former Chief Minister DMK chief M.K. Stalin, has repeatedly failed that test.


His arrest over an allegedly vulgar, sexually suggestive remark aimed at Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay and actor Trisha Krishnan is, in one sense, a legal matter that must be adjudicated by the courts. Whether his words meet the threshold for criminal liability under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Information Technology Act or Tamil Nadu’s law against harassment of women is for judges to decide. But legality is not the only standard by which public life should be measured. Political decency matters. And the DMK leader has once again demonstrated a startling absence of judgment.


During a protest over the Cauvery water dispute, Udhayanidhi, the opposition’s most recognisable face allowed himself to descend into playground innuendo after sections of the crowd chanted an actor’s name. A rally meant to spotlight one of Tamil Nadu's most pressing water disputes was instantly reduced to gossip and insinuation. That may have amused partisan supporters, but it did nothing to advance the cause they had assembled to champion.


The DMK predictably insists this is political vendetta by the ruling TVK government, a convenient diversion from administrative failures. This does not absolve Stalin of responsibility for his own conduct. Those who aspire to govern must also know where civility ends and crudity begins.


His latest controversy is part of a troubling pattern. Udhayanidhi’s repeated pouring of vitriol over Sanatana Dharma – in 2023, he compared Sanatana Dharma to malaria, dengue and COVID-19 – has generated precisely the outrage it appeared designed to provoke. His subsequent reiteration in the Tamil Nadu Assembly that Sanatana Dharma “must certainly be abolished” suggested his penchant for manufacturing controversies and dominating headlines.


This is especially disappointing because Tamil Nadu has long prided itself on an intellectually rigorous political culture. The state’s public discourse has produced formidable debaters, social reformers and administrators capable of combining ideological conviction with rhetorical sophistication.


Now it seems that dynastic entitlement has become a substitute for political maturity. The burden on second-generation leaders is heavier precisely because inherited prominence invites heightened scrutiny. Every careless phrase reinforces the suspicion that public office has become less about public service than permanent performance.


India’s politics already suffers from performative outrage and collapsing standards of public debate. It needs fewer provocateurs and more statesmen. Until politicians understand that distinction, the coarsening of democratic discourse will continue, regardless of which party occupies the treasury benches or the opposition front row.

Comments


bottom of page