Search

Urban areas contribute to nearly two-thirds of India's gross domestic product, but only constitute 31% of the country's population. In this paper, I address the following questions: What are the specializations of Indian cities and towns, and how have these changed over time; and what part of the specialization identified is a result of local advantages versus industry or national economic growth? Answers to these questions are basic to sustaining the competitiveness of India's cities. I used standard Census of India data at city level to compute location quotients for India's cities and towns, and examined changes in their economic base over time. Further, I performed shift-share analyses for selected large cities to disaggregate their employment growth. On average, over 1991-2001, specialization in all sectors, with the exception of trade, decreased. I found evidence of persistence in the sectoral specialization of Indian cities during 1991-2001. Further, in all non-agricultural economic sectors, cities in states know to be backward and lagging are specialized in most sectors. Based on location quotient analyses, I find that Mumbai is the financial capital of the country, Delhi is the seat of public administration, and Bengaluru specializes in transport, storage, and communications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cities and towns of India constitute the world's second largest urban system and contribute over 50% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). This phenomenon has been neglected by the existing studies and writings on urban India. By considering 59 large cities in India and employing new economic geography models, this paper investigates the relevant state- and city-specific determinants of urban agglomeration and urban economic growth. In addition, the effect of urban agglomeration on India's urban economic growth is estimated. The empirical results show that agglomeration economies are policy-induced as well as market-determined and offer evidence of the strong positive effect of agglomeration on urban economic growth in India's urban system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sometimes the design of a policy is responsible for not achieving the desired results, and not really the implementation, which usually receives the blame. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the rapid economic growth of some East Asian countries including India and China. The author notes that China has remarkable economic performance, with an annual 7% increase in per capita gross domestic product (GDP) and an almost 12-fold increase in per capita real income, while India has 3.1% increase in per capita GDP for the same period and three-fold increase in its per capita real income. The author also mentions the contributing factors of this growth.

We offer the first test of the hypothesis that rapid growth helps incumbents win elections for a developing country, India. We generalize the Fair (1978) model to allow for multiple candidates and test it using cross-state data on 422 candidates in the 2009 parliamentary elections. We find quantitatively large and statistically robust effect of growth on the prospects of the candidates of the state incumbent parties to win elections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information regarding the electricity scarcity in India. According to Census 2011, 55.3 percent of rural and 92.7 percent of urban households have access to electricity, and the national electrification rate is a minimum 74 percent. 306 million people in India, constituting 25 percent of the total population, lacked any access to electricity in 2011. Implementation of New Policies Scenario(NPS) would significantly enhance the electrification rate in India to 90 percent.