Lably
Skip to content

Economic development in India

  • 15 min read
  • 8 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Socialism, Compound annual growth rate and Gujarat

In the late 2000s, India's growth reached 7.5%, which will double the average income in a decade. IMF says that if India pushed more fundamental market reforms, it could sustain the rate and even reach the government's 2011 target of 10%. States have large responsibilities over their economies. The average annual growth rates (2007–12) for Gujarat (13.86%), Uttarakhand (13.66%), Bihar (10.15%) or Jharkhand (9.85%) were higher than for West Bengal (6.24%), Maharashtra (7.84%), Odisha (7.05%), Punjab (11.78%) or Assam (5.88%). India is the fourth largest economy in the world by nominal basis and the third largest by purchasing power parity adjusted exchange rates (PPP). On per capita basis, it ranks 140th in the world or 129th by PPP.

The economic growth has been driven by the expansion of the services that have been growing consistently faster than other sectors. It is argued that the pattern of Indian development has been a specific one and that the country may be able to skip the intermediate industrialisation-led phase in the transformation of its economic structure. Serious concerns have been raised about the jobless nature of the economic growth.

Favourable macroeconomic performance has been a necessary but not sufficient condition for the significant improvement in the human development indicators. Although the rate of poverty declined after economic reforms of 1991, the improvement in human development has been less than satisfactory. For instance, child malnutrition has continued to persist (46% in 2005–6).

The progress of economic changes in India is followed closely. The World Bank suggests that the most important priorities are public sector reform, infrastructure, agricultural and rural development, removal of labour regulations, reforms in lagging states, and HIV/AIDS. For 2018, India ranked 77th in Ease of Doing Business Index. According to Index of Economic Freedom World Ranking an annual survey on economic freedom of the nations, India ranks 123rd as compared with China and Russia which ranks 138th and 144th respectively in 2014.

At the turn of the century India's GDP was at around US$480 billion. As economic reforms picked up pace, India's GDP grew five-fold to reach US$2.2 trillion in 2015 (as per IMF estimates).

India's GDP growth during January–March period of 2015 was at 7.5% compared to China's 7%, making it the fastest growing MAJOR economy. During 2014–15, India's GDP growth recovered marginally to 7.3% from 6.9% in the previous fiscal. During 2014–15, India's services sector grew by 10.1%, manufacturing sector by 7.1% & agriculture by 0.2%. Indian Economy grew at 7.6 & 7.1 in FY 2015–16 and FY 2016–17 respectively as major reforms had taken place like demonetization and implementation of GST in FY 2016–17.

History

Prior to India's Independence, from the period of 1900 to 1947, per capita income in India had either declined or stagnated. Post-Independence, Jawaharlal Nehru demonstrated his willingness to compromise socialism for the perceived benefit of the country to provide financial incentives for the expansion of private enterprise. However, after the crisis of 1957, India turned towards import substitution industrialization and introduced foreign exchange. The Nehru-Mahalanobis approach, often referred to as the Second Five Year Plan, emphasized the development of basic and heavy industries as a means of accelerating economic growth. These included steel, copper, petrochemicals, paper, coal, and oil. Mahalanobis strived for India to reach autonomy, ridding any outstanding debts. Critics disagreed with this approach, stating that World Bank's claim of Indian export prospects being low were falsified and due to India's inward-looking strategy, the growth opportunity of the world economy was missed. Nonetheless, over 1950–1965, India's acceleration of per capita income growth had increased an average of 1.7%, a value not exceeded since.

The discourse on the efficacy of the Nehru-Mahalanobis Strategy is commonly contested by economists. A criticism of the approach emphasizes the lack of resource allocation in the agriculture sector. It is argued that the misbalanced weightage towards the machine-making sector contributed to the increase in food-grain prices and thus, perpetuated poverty and malnutrition. Defenders of the strategy claim that it sought to increase agricultural output by increasing the output-capital ratio. This agreeably would have been accomplished through land-reforms, something the strategy did not address, not indicating a problem with the strategy itself.

Sign in to keep reading

7 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in India