Regional Imbalances In India
India has been passing through the economic imbalances in its different regions since long. Following are the main causes which are responsible for the same -
1) Historical Factor - Regional imbalance started in India from its British regime. The British rulers and Industrialists started to develop only those regions of the country which were possessing rich potential for manufacturing and trading activities. They mostly preferred to concentrate in West Bengal and Maharashtra and more particularly in cities like Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai. They concentrated all their industries in and around these cities neglecting the rest of country to remain backward.
The Land policy followed by the British frustrated the Farmers to the maximum extent and led to the growth of privileged class like Zamindars and Money lenders for the exploitation of poor farmers. In the absence of proper land reforms and industrial policy, country could not achieve the economic growth to a satisfactory level. The uneven pattern of investment in industry as well as in economic overheads like Transport and Communication facilities, Irrigation and Power resulted in uneven growth in some areas keeping other areas totally neglected.
2) Geographical Factor - Most of the Himalayan states i.e. H.P, Northern Kashmir, Hill districts of U.P., Bihar, Arunachal Pradesh and North Eastern states remained mostly backward due to its inaccessibility leading to increase in cost of administration and its development projects making mobilization of resources difficult. Secondly, adverse climate and flood prone areas are the responsible factors for uneven growth mainly low growth in agriculture and industrialisation productivity.
3) Locational advantages - While determining iron and steel, refineries or heavy industry projects locational advantages are getting special attention which causes regional imbalances.
The other main factors responsible for uneven growth of Regions are -
1) Inadequacy of Economic overheads.
2) Failure of Planning mechanism.
3) Lack of growth of Ancillary industries in backward areas.
4) Lack of motivation for backward areas.
5) Political instability.
6) Marginalisation of impact of Green Revolution to certain regions.
Even though balanced growth has been accepted as one of the major objectives of Economic Planning but it did not make much headway in achieving this object. In real sense, Planning mechanism have enlarged the disparity between developed and less developed states.
Political instability in the form of unstable Govt.,extremist violence, law and order etc. have been obstructing flow of investments in backward areas.
Govt. has concentrated its strategy to heavy irrigated areas to use the scarce resources in a more productive manner. Thus, benefit of Green Revolution become restricted to Punjab, Haryana and Plains of U.P., leaving other states in dark about the adoption of new agricultural strategy. This has made well-off Farmers much better off whereas dry farmers and non-farming rural population remains totally untouched. In this way, new agricultural strategy has further aggravated regional imbalances. In respect of allocation of plan outlay, developed states get more favour than less developed states.
- - - - - - - -
1) Historical Factor - Regional imbalance started in India from its British regime. The British rulers and Industrialists started to develop only those regions of the country which were possessing rich potential for manufacturing and trading activities. They mostly preferred to concentrate in West Bengal and Maharashtra and more particularly in cities like Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai. They concentrated all their industries in and around these cities neglecting the rest of country to remain backward.
The Land policy followed by the British frustrated the Farmers to the maximum extent and led to the growth of privileged class like Zamindars and Money lenders for the exploitation of poor farmers. In the absence of proper land reforms and industrial policy, country could not achieve the economic growth to a satisfactory level. The uneven pattern of investment in industry as well as in economic overheads like Transport and Communication facilities, Irrigation and Power resulted in uneven growth in some areas keeping other areas totally neglected.
2) Geographical Factor - Most of the Himalayan states i.e. H.P, Northern Kashmir, Hill districts of U.P., Bihar, Arunachal Pradesh and North Eastern states remained mostly backward due to its inaccessibility leading to increase in cost of administration and its development projects making mobilization of resources difficult. Secondly, adverse climate and flood prone areas are the responsible factors for uneven growth mainly low growth in agriculture and industrialisation productivity.
3) Locational advantages - While determining iron and steel, refineries or heavy industry projects locational advantages are getting special attention which causes regional imbalances.
The other main factors responsible for uneven growth of Regions are -
1) Inadequacy of Economic overheads.
2) Failure of Planning mechanism.
3) Lack of growth of Ancillary industries in backward areas.
4) Lack of motivation for backward areas.
5) Political instability.
6) Marginalisation of impact of Green Revolution to certain regions.
Even though balanced growth has been accepted as one of the major objectives of Economic Planning but it did not make much headway in achieving this object. In real sense, Planning mechanism have enlarged the disparity between developed and less developed states.
Political instability in the form of unstable Govt.,extremist violence, law and order etc. have been obstructing flow of investments in backward areas.
Govt. has concentrated its strategy to heavy irrigated areas to use the scarce resources in a more productive manner. Thus, benefit of Green Revolution become restricted to Punjab, Haryana and Plains of U.P., leaving other states in dark about the adoption of new agricultural strategy. This has made well-off Farmers much better off whereas dry farmers and non-farming rural population remains totally untouched. In this way, new agricultural strategy has further aggravated regional imbalances. In respect of allocation of plan outlay, developed states get more favour than less developed states.
- - - - - - - -
Comments