Q6
(a) Evaluate Kuznets' inverted U shaped curve hypothesis of income distribution. Does it hold good for less developed countries as well ? (15 marks) (b) Does human capital cause economic growth ? Explain how human capital formation can be enhanced. (15 marks) (c) Explain how Harrod's warranted rate of growth is similar to Domar's required rate of growth. How has Solow improved upon Harrod-Domar's growth model ? (20 marks)
हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें
(a) कुज़नेट्स की आय वितरण उलटे U आकार वक्र परिकल्पना का मूल्यांकन कीजिए । क्या यह (परिकल्पना) अल्पविकसित देशों के लिये भी सत्य है ? (15 अंक) (b) क्या मानव-पूँजी आर्थिक वृद्धि का कारण है ? स्पष्ट कीजिए कि मानव-पूँजी-निर्माण को कैसे बढ़ाया जा सकता है । (15 अंक) (c) स्पष्ट कीजिए कि हैरोड की बांछित वृद्धि दर एवं डोमर की आवश्यक वृद्धि दर समान हैं । सोलो ने हैरोड-डोमर वृद्धि मॉडल को किस प्रकार उन्नत किया है ? (20 अंक)
Directive word: Evaluate
This question asks you to evaluate. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.
See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.
How this answer will be evaluated
Approach
Begin with a brief introduction acknowledging the three interconnected themes: inequality, human capital, and growth models. For part (a), spend ~30% time evaluating Kuznets' hypothesis with empirical evidence; for (b), allocate ~30% establishing causality and policy measures; for (c), dedicate ~40% explaining the Harrod-Domar similarity mathematically and contrasting with Solow's neoclassical improvements. Conclude by synthesizing how these theories inform contemporary development policy.
Key points expected
- For (a): Explain Kuznets' inverted U-curve mechanism (structural shift from agriculture to industry) and evaluate using evidence from developed vs. developing nations; discuss critics like Anand-Kanbur and Piketty's U-shaped revival
- For (a): Assess applicability to LDCs with Indian/Chinese experience—whether inequality rose during early growth and factors like skill-biased technological change and crony capitalism
- For (b): Establish endogenous growth theory causality from human capital to productivity (Lucas, Romer); distinguish between quantity (enrollment) and quality (learning outcomes) of human capital
- For (b): Detail enhancement mechanisms—public expenditure on education/health, skill India mission, vocational training, reducing malnutrition, and addressing gender gaps in human capital formation
- For (c): Mathematically demonstrate Harrod's warranted rate (Gw = s/Cr) equals Domar's required rate (σs), showing both depend on savings rate and capital-output ratio
- For (c): Contrast Harrod-Domar's knife-edge instability with Solow's stable equilibrium through substitutability of capital and labor; explain how Solow's residual (TFP) incorporates technological progress
- For (c): Critically evaluate Solow's limitations (exogenous technology) and subsequent endogenous growth models (Romer, Lucas) that internalized human capital and innovation
Evaluation rubric
| Dimension | Weight | Max marks | Excellent | Average | Poor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept correctness | 22% | 11 | Precisely defines Kuznets' structural transformation mechanism, distinguishes between warranted/natural/actual rates in Harrod-Domar, correctly identifies Solow's production function properties (CRS, diminishing returns), and accurately explains endogenous vs. exogenous growth distinctions | Basic definitions present but conflates Harrod's warranted with natural rate, vague on Solow's improvement mechanism, or treats human capital as mere education enrollment without productivity linkage | Fundamental errors—confuses Kuznets with Lorenz curve, treats Harrod and Domar as completely different models, or believes Solow rejected savings rate importance entirely |
| Diagram / model | 18% | 9 | Draws labeled Kuznets curve with Gini coefficient on Y-axis and per capita income on X-axis; presents Harrod-Domar growth diagram showing knife-edge instability; illustrates Solow model with steady-state convergence diagram showing sf(k) and (n+δ)k curves | Mentions diagrams exist without drawing them, or draws Kuznets curve without axes labels, or presents Solow diagram without explaining the steady-state equilibrium condition | No diagrams attempted, or completely misdrawn relationships (e.g., upward sloping Kuznets throughout, or Solow with increasing returns to scale) |
| Quantitative reasoning | 16% | 8 | Shows mathematical equivalence: Gw = s/Cr = σs = required rate; derives Solow steady-state condition sy = (n+δ)k; calculates implied growth rates with plausible Indian parameters (s=30%, v=4, giving 7.5% warranted rate) | States formulas without derivation or application; mentions s/v relationship without numerical illustration; aware that Solow adds depreciation and population growth to the equation | No mathematical treatment; purely verbal description of 'savings help growth' without any rate-of-growth equations or quantitative relationships |
| Indian / empirical examples | 22% | 11 | For (a): Cites India's rising Gini post-1991 and debate on inclusive growth; for (b): References ASER reports on learning poverty, PMKVY, and health outcomes (NFHS-5); for (c): Applies model to explain India's capital-deepening experience and TFP growth estimates | Generic mention of 'India is developing' or 'inequality exists'; names schemes without connecting to theoretical framework; no specific data points or empirical studies cited | No Indian examples; or irrelevant examples (discussing US Great Depression for Kuznets); factually wrong claims about Indian growth experience |
| Policy implication | 22% | 11 | Derives specific policies: for (a)—progressive taxation, social protection floors to manage inequality transition; for (b)—early childhood intervention, public-private skill partnerships; for (c)—investment climate reforms raising savings efficiency, R&D incentives addressing Solow's technology residual | Lists standard policies without theoretical grounding—'government should spend more on education' without linking to Lucas externality or endogenous growth mechanism | No policy discussion; or contradictory recommendations (e.g., suggesting import substitution to achieve Harrod's warranted rate without considering open economy constraints) |
Practice this exact question
Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.
Evaluate my answer →More from Economics 2021 Paper I
- Q1 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Compare and contrast Marshallian and Walrasian approaches of the stability in e…
- Q2 (a) Explain the differences between Cournot model of duopoly with similar product and differentiated product. (15 marks) (b) What type of c…
- Q3 (a) Show that differences in underlying expectation lead to differences in Keynesian and classical aggregate supply curve. (15 marks) (b) A…
- Q4 (a) Derive short-run aggregate supply curve following Lucas, when expectations are not realised, assuming that labour market clears. What w…
- Q5 Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Explain Rosenstein-Rodan's view that economic underdevelopment is the outcome o…
- Q6 (a) Evaluate Kuznets' inverted U shaped curve hypothesis of income distribution. Does it hold good for less developed countries as well ? (…
- Q7 (a) Discuss the theory of acquired advantage in international trade using suitable examples. (15 marks) (b) Do you think that movement of t…
- Q8 (a) If the government raises taxes on labour income and interest income, explain how potential GDP and economic growth are affected. (15 ma…