Despite its democratic DNA, will India be lured by China's economic model?

During Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to China this week, the Sino-Indian border dispute, trade imbalance and general cooperation between the two Asian giants should be high on the discussion agenda.

Apart from these items, Modi is likely to keep an eye on a few other things. For one, he may monitor the comments that he gets on his new Weibo account from his "Chinese friends". But more importantly, he might try to unlock one puzzle during his first visit to China as prime minister: why has China achieved much faster economic development in recent decades, despite India ticking almost all the boxes on the Western model of development: democracy, human rights, the rule of law, an independent judiciary and a free media?

Compared with China's per capita gross domestic product of more than US$6,800, India's per capita GDP hovers around US$1,500. In fact, China beats India in almost all economic development indicators.

China ranks 91st on the UN Development Programme Human Development Index, compared to India's 135th. Life expectancy at birth is 75.3 years in China, while it is 66.4 in India; 32.7 per cent of the Indian population lives below the US$1.25 per day poverty line, compared with 11.8 per cent of Chinese. The adult literacy is 95.1 per cent in China, while it is 62.8 per cent in India. Gender inequality and violence against women are also higher in India.

Corruption may be one surprising exception, despite President Xi Jinping's anti-graft drive. According to Transparency International's 2014 Corruption Perception Index of 175 countries, India ranks 85th, compared with China at 100. Press freedom may be another consolation for India. In the 2015 Reporters Without Borders's World Press Freedom Index of 180 countries, China occupies 176th position, while India ranks 136th.

What explains these differences in the development trajectory of China and India? Several factors have contributed to India's slower economic growth and the realisation of socio-economic rights in comparison to China. First, the policy coherence not only among the three branches of government but also during the leadership transition is much better in an authoritarian regime like China. On the other hand, decisions are slowed or reversed because of party politics and the separation of powers among the three government branches.

Second, compared with China, India has lacked the presence of strong leaders with long-term vision. The era of coalition politics in India since the early 1990s has also contributed to policy paralysis. China need not deal with any of these speed-breakers.