In 2018, I had argued that skill development was not merely a future necessity but an immediate economic imperative. The premise was simple: equip people with relevant skills, and economic opportunity would follow. It was a reasonable argument for its time, rooted in a belief that economies function within broadly predictable systems.
That belief no longer holds.
The world has changed more rapidly than many anticipated. A recent analysis, From Global Shock to Local Resilience, captures this shift with striking clarity. It points to a global economy no longer defined by stability, but by disruption — geopolitical tensions, economic volatility, technological upheaval, and environmental uncertainty.
In such a world, earlier assumptions about growth, employment, and development need to be revisited. Including my own.
The traditional economic pathway — skills, jobs, stability — was built on the expectation of continuity. It is assumed that markets would expand, industries would absorb labour, and growth would create opportunity.
That environment has fractured.
Across the world, even advanced economies are grappling with supply chain disruptions, inflationary pressures, technological displacement, and uncertain labour markets. Stability is no longer the default condition. Instead, economies are being judged by their ability to withstand shocks.
This shift from growth to resilience is not theoretical. It is already shaping policy and planning in many parts of the world. The question is no longer simply how economies grow, but how they survive disruption without collapsing.
For Kashmir, this question is even more urgent.
Kashmir Beyond Standard Framework
Kashmir’s economic discourse often follows a familiar script: infrastructure expansion, tourism growth, investment promotion, and skill development. These are important components of any development strategy.
But they assume something fundamental, a relatively normal economic environment.
Kashmir does not operate within such an environment.
Its economy is shaped by structural constraints that alter how economic processes unfold. There is limited control over economic direction, persistent uncertainty that affects investor confidence, and a narrow, state-dependent economic base.
In such conditions, conventional economic models do not produce conventional outcomes. Instead, they produce what may appear as growth, but lacks depth and durability. Activity becomes visible, but stability remains elusive.
This is not a failure in the conventional sense. It is a mismatch between model and reality.
This mismatch is most evident in our approach to skill development.
The idea that skills lead directly to employment rests on the assumption that markets are capable of absorbing labour. But what happens when markets themselves are unstable, or structurally constrained?
In Kashmir’s case, skill development remains necessary, but it is no longer sufficient.
Training programmes continue to produce skilled individuals, but the local economy does not always have the capacity to absorb them. The result is a growing disconnect between capability and opportunity.
Skills, in this context, risk becoming an isolated intervention — generating potential without pathways.
This is not an argument against skill development. It is an argument against treating it as a standalone solution.
From Growth to Resilience
The emerging global emphasis on resilience offers a more realistic framework.
It shifts the focus from expansion to endurance, from output to stability, from short-term gains to long-term adaptability. It recognises that economic systems must be designed not only to grow, but to withstand shocks.
For Kashmir, this shift is critical.
An economy that cannot absorb disruption cannot deliver sustainable progress. Development indicators may improve, investments may be announced, and sectors may expand, but without resilience, these gains remain fragile.
Resilience demands a different kind of thinking. It requires building systems that can function under stress, not just perform under ideal conditions.
There is, however, a deeper issue that both older and newer economic frameworks often understate.
Economic systems do not operate in isolation. They are shaped by the degree of control, agency, and predictability within which they function.
In Kashmir, these factors remain constrained.
This creates a fundamental contradiction. Development is pursued, growth is projected, but the structural conditions required to sustain that growth remain limited.
The result is an economy that expands in fragments but does not transform as a whole. Certain sectors show progress, but the system as a whole remains vulnerable.
Until this contradiction is acknowledged, economic planning will continue to operate within a partial reality.
Rethinking Economic Future
If both the global environment and local conditions have changed, then the response cannot be incremental. It must be conceptual.
Kashmir’s economic thinking needs to evolve along three key lines.
First, uncertainty must be accepted as the baseline. Planning cannot assume stability. It must anticipate disruption as a recurring condition.
Second, resilience must be prioritised over optics. Economic success cannot be measured only through growth indicators or headline investments. It must be assessed by the system’s ability to endure shocks and sustain livelihoods.
Third, capacity must be aligned with reality. Skills, investments, and policies must be grounded in what the economic system can realistically absorb and sustain.
These are not easy shifts. They require moving away from familiar narratives and embracing a more complex and sometimes uncomfortable understanding of economic reality.
The evolution from a skill-focused approach in 2018 to a resilience-focused perspective today reflects a broader shift in how we understand development itself.
The question is no longer whether people are prepared for the economy.
The more pressing question is whether the economy, as it exists, is capable of sustaining them.
Until that question is addressed honestly, even well-intentioned interventions will continue to produce uneven outcomes.
Economic progress is not just about building capacity. It is about ensuring that there is a system capable of absorbing, sustaining, and rewarding that capacity.
That is where the real challenge lies.
And that is where Kashmir’s economic imagination must now turn.
Have you liked the news article?