Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T16:46:26.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Strategy of Indian Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, Mr. I. M. D. Little, who recently returned from India, gives his view of the problems of India on the eve of the Third Five-year Plan. Mr. Little is a Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford. He was in India for a year as a member of the team sent by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Centre for International Studies. His main conclusions are given on page 29.

Type
Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 9 , May 1960 , pp. 20 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © 1960 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

note (1) page 20 Following Indian practice, investment and national income are, throughout, measured net of depreciation (for which allowances are very rough). Gross figures are not published.

note (2) page 20 Plan expenditure and investment expenditure differ, for certain increases in current public expenditure are included in the Plan. But, throughout, only the estimated investment size and content of the Plans is referred to.

note (3) page 20 It is impossible to let Indian figures speak for themselves. Sometimes they do not exist. Often they are years out of date. Always far more background is required for their interpretation than can be given in an article. National income figures exist, but are very unreliable. There is no series of investment figures, even for the public sector. Several different agricultural output estimates exist, and differ widely. Accurate output estimates exist for some particular industrial products. The balance of payments estimates are good, but trade figures are very unreliable for imports. In short, the reader must accept the author's judgement where figures are given or used, and must take them as orders of magnitude, except where the context implies otherwise, and he must not always expect sources or complete tables, which, if presented, would often shed more darkness than light. It is extraordinary what little fuss the Planning Commission makes about the poverty of Indian statistics.

note (1) page 21 See the letter to Mr. Eugene Black from Sir Oliver Franks, Dr. Abs, and Mr. Sproule. The letter emphasises India's basic needs, and generally accepts the strategy of her planning with only minor comments. It records the request for aid given below, but naturally could not commit itself to any view as to how much might actually be forthcoming, since this is a matter for the providing governments.

note (2) page 21 This refers to the United States Public Law Number 480, under which surplus agricultural products are disposed of against payment in local currency. These local currency payments are mostly held by the United States Ambassador, before being ultimately lent or granted back to the purchasing government.

note (1) page 22 The National Sample Survey, Report No. 14. March 1959.

note (2) page 22 Investment, and the use of foreign resources, have both fallen since the peak of 1957/58, and income has increased. Over the whole Plan foreign resources may account for almost one-third of investment. See table 23.

note (1) page 23 Roughly speaking, the levels of income and investment envisaged in 1955/56 for the period 1960-1970, in terms of 1952/53 rupees, remain as targets. But they are now in terms of 1957/58 rupees. This means that the anticipated levels of income and investment for the next ten years, while bearing roughly the same relation to each other, are in real terms lower by 10-15 per cent than they were expected to be five years ago.

note (2) page 23 Official sources give a similar breakdown only for private imports, which are about half the total imports. The separate items are my estimates of the c.i.f. value of imports, whereas the total is an official payments figure. But it seems that the best estimate of total imports would be very close to the payments figure, which has therefore been used for the sake of convenience.

note (1) page 27 For instance, Report on India's Food Crisis and Steps to Meet It, Ford Foundation Agricultural Production Team, 1959.

note (1) page 28 Ford Foundation Agricultural Production Team, op cit.