India, Oct. 17 -- Every Nobel Prize in Economics tells a story about how we understand prosperity. This year's winners - Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt - have been honoured for explaining how knowledge powers economic growth and how economies renew themselves through creative destruction. Their research answers an age-old question that has puzzled thinkers from Adam Smith to Amartya Sen: Why do some nations grow while others stagnate? And it offers timely lessons for countries like India with aspirations to rapidly climb the growth ladder. For centuries, economists have debated: What truly drives economic growth? Early theories pointed to geography; the claim that tropical climates bred lethargy, disease and poor soil. Others emphasised natural resources, until Japan, almost barren of them, proved the theory wrong after its Meiji Restoration in 1870. Later, scholars blamed a lack of capital or ignorance of sound policies, giving rise to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and their prescriptions for growth and stability. More recently, the focus shifted to institutions. Last year's Nobel honoured Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson for showing how strong, inclusive institutions underpin prosperity. Yet none of these theories offers a fully satisfactory explanation. Geography explains location, not dynamism. Institutions matter, but they do not by themselves generate ideas. This year's Nobel adds a crucial layer - the cultural and policy foundations that sustain continuous innovation. Mokyr shows that societies flourish when they prize curiosity and knowledge. Aghion and Howitt explain how those ideas drive productivity through relentless competition and renewal. Together, they reveal not just why growth happens, but why it keeps happening. For most of human history, economic growth barely existed. A peasant in 1500 lived much like one in 500 BCE. Then, in the mid-18th century, something extraordinary happened: the world's output and living standards exploded. In A Culture of Growth (2016), Mokyr argues that this turning point was not about geography or resources, but about a shift in values. Beginning in 17th century Europe, societies started treating knowledge as a collective good that was to be pursued, shared and applied. A "Republic of Letters" emerged, where scientists and inventors corresponded across borders, building upon one another's discoveries. Mokyr's insight is simple but profound: Growth is a cultural achievement. It demands a society that values learning, tolerates dissent and believes that tomorrow can be made better than today. If Mokyr explains how knowledge accumulates, Aghion and Howitt explain how it powers economies. Their 1992 model of creative destruction formalised Joseph Schumpeter's idea that progress depends on churn - new firms and technologies replacing the old. Innovation, in their world, is both a blessing and a disruption. It raises productivity but displaces jobs and industries. Growth thrives where competition is vigorous and where policy cushions the transition without freezing it. Their message is bracing: Economies that cling to incumbents in the name of stability often end up stagnant. True stability, paradoxically, comes from continuous renewal. Emerging Artificial Intelligence (AI) now presents a 21st century test of creative destruction. Like the steam engine or electricity before it, AI promises immense productivity gains but also upheaval. Entire industries may fade while new ones arise. The lesson from this year's Nobel is clear: Progress needs both the churn and the compassion to manage it. Societies that resist change or fail to share its benefits will struggle; those that embrace innovation while supporting those disrupted by it will advance. What do these insights mean for India? The country has the ingredients of dynamism - a young workforce, a growing digital economy and entrepreneurial energy. But it also risks getting caught in partial modernity - innovation at the frontier, inertia at the foundations. To sustain growth, India must not just produce more, but think better. That requires building a genuine culture of curiosity - in classrooms, laboratories and public life. Education should teach problem-solving, not just test-taking. Bureaucracies must see experimentation not as chaos but as discovery. India also needs to embrace competition. Too often, policy shelters incumbents - public or private - in the name of stability. As Aghion and Howitt remind us, protecting the old suffocates the new. Transparent competition rules, easier market entry and the courage to let unproductive firms exit are the real engines of progress. At the same time, India must equip its people for change. Creative destruction is disruptive. The humane response is not to block innovation but to help people adapt. Lifelong learning, retraining and portable safety nets can turn dislocation into opportunity. Finally, India must broaden innovation beyond big cities. A culture of growth flourishes where curiosity meets opportunity - in small towns, local enterprises and state universities as much as in top end research parks. These are not lofty prescriptions; they are pragmatic steps for a country on the cusp of becoming the world's third-largest economy. When Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations in 1776, he showed how the invisible hand of free markets could lift prosperity. Two centuries later, Gunnar Myrdal's The Poverty of Nations (1976) reminded the world that progress remains uneven. The Nobels of 2024 and 2025 - first to Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson for institutions, then to Mokyr, Aghion and Howitt for innovation and creative destruction - complete that story. Good institutions make progress possible; a culture of ideas and competition turn that possibility into reality. For India, the lesson is clear. Sustained growth will not come from subsidies or slogans, but from nurturing minds that question, firms that compete and systems that allow both to flourish....