The Unseen Battle: Plagiarism Claims Ignite a Firestorm Between RBI and SBI Think Tanks

Picture this: a world usually confined to academic journals and intricate policy papers, the very core of economic research, suddenly exploding onto social media. It's a clash, frankly, that few saw coming – a high-profile accusation of plagiarism hurled from the Reserve Bank of India straight towards the State Bank of India. And you could say, the reverberations are quite significant, echoing far beyond the digital skirmish itself.

At the heart of this rather uncomfortable public dispute stands Harendra Behera, a seasoned economist from the RBI, who certainly didn’t mince words. He took to LinkedIn, of all places, to call out a paper published by his counterparts at SBI – specifically, Soumya Kanti Ghosh, Goutam Kumar Mitra, and Satyajit Kumar. Behera’s contention? Portions of their research, particularly concerning a 'Diffusion Index for Services' (DIS), were lifted, he alleges, from his own earlier work, all without what he deemed proper, explicit attribution. It's a charge, in truth, that strikes at the very bedrock of academic integrity.

This isn't just any old economic indicator, mind you; the DIS is a nuanced tool designed to gauge activity within India’s services sector. Behera claims to have pioneered its development for the Indian context in a paper dating back to 2018. His accusation pointed to a striking similarity between his conceptualisation and certain elements within the SBI team’s recent paper. The omission of his specific 2018 contribution, he argued, amounted to a serious oversight, if not something more deliberate.

But as with any good story, there’s another side. Soumya Kanti Ghosh, the group chief economic advisor at SBI and a prominent voice in his own right, swiftly and vehemently denied the plagiarism allegations. Ghosh's defense? Well, he asserted that the Diffusion Index, as a concept, is rather common in economic literature; it's hardly exclusive territory. And furthermore, he highlighted that their paper did indeed cite several sources, including other works by Behera himself, but not the specific 2018 paper that was the crux of the accusation.

Ghosh elaborated, contending that the SBI team’s methodology for constructing the DIS was, in fact, quite distinct from Behera’s approach. They had, he explained, developed their own independent model for its construction and application. The nuance here, perhaps, lies in the interpretation of 'common knowledge' versus original contribution, and what constitutes adequate referencing in the labyrinthine world of economic models. It's a fine line, many would agree.

So, LinkedIn, an unexpected arena, became the battleground for this intellectual joust. A surprising stage, perhaps, for such a weighty academic debate, but one that certainly ensured the spotlight was firmly on. The entire episode has, quite naturally, stirred a significant pot within India's financial and academic communities. It begs questions, doesn't it, about research ethics, about the delicate dance of attribution, and, frankly, about the public image of some of the nation’s most respected financial institutions.

When economists, particularly those representing such influential bodies as the RBI and SBI, engage in such a public dispute, the implications ripple outwards. It underscores the ever-present challenge of maintaining rigorous academic standards and ensuring proper credit is given where it's truly due. The saga, honestly, offers a rare, somewhat unsettling glimpse into the often-hidden tensions and ethical quandaries that can simmer beneath the surface of even the most august institutions. And for once, the economic headlines aren't about interest rates or inflation, but something far more human: intellectual ownership and professional integrity.