Economics 2021 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Examine

Q1

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Examine the factors that facilitated commercialisation of Indian agriculture during the British rule. (10 marks) (b) Do you think that the 'new guarantee' system was better than the 'old guarantee' system in the history of Railways in India? Give reasons. (10 marks) (c) Analyse the relevance of Gadgil formula in reducing horizontal imbalance of fiscal health. (10 marks) (d) Explain the principal causes of deceleration in industrial growth during the mid-1960s to mid-1970s. (10 marks) (e) Distinguish between absolute measure and relative measure of poverty. What kind of measure is used in estimating poverty in India? (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में लिखिए : (a) ब्रिटिश शासनकाल में भारतीय कृषि के व्यापारीकरण को बढ़ावा देने वाले कारकों की समीक्षा कीजिए। (10 अंक) (b) क्या आप समझते हैं कि भारत में रेलवे के इतिहास में 'नई जमानत (गारंटी)' व्यवस्था, 'पुरानी जमानत' व्यवस्था से श्रेष्ठ थी? कारण बताइए। (10 अंक) (c) राजकोषीय स्वास्थ्य (फिस्कल हेल्थ) में क्षैतिज असंतुलन को दूर करने में गाडगिल सूत्र की प्रासंगिकता का विश्लेषण कीजिए। (10 अंक) (d) 1960 के दशक के मध्य से 1970 के दशक के मध्य औद्योगिक वृद्धि के धीमे पड़ने के मुख्य कारणों की विवेचना कीजिए। (10 अंक) (e) निर्धनता की निरपेक्ष माप एवं सापेक्ष माप में भेद कीजिए। भारत में निर्धनता का आकलन किस माप से किया जाता है? (10 अंक)

Directive word: Examine

This question asks you to examine. 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

The directive 'examine' requires critical analysis with evidence for each sub-part. Allocate approximately 30 words per mark (150 words × 5 parts). Structure each part with: brief context (20%), analytical body covering multiple dimensions (60%), and balanced conclusion (20%). For (a) focus on colonial economic mechanisms; (b) compare both railway guarantee systems; (c) evaluate Gadgil formula's horizontal equalization; (d) analyse industrial deceleration factors; (e) distinguish poverty measures with India's Tendulkar/Rangarajan methodology.

Key points expected

  • (a) Commercialisation drivers: Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari impact, cash crop demand (opium, indigo, cotton), export orientation, moneylender penetration, transport revolution (railways), and integration with world markets
  • (b) Railway guarantee comparison: Old guarantee (5% return to companies vs. state burden) vs. New guarantee (state construction, 1879 policy shift, reduced private profit drain, nationalist critique of 'drain of wealth')
  • (c) Gadgil formula relevance: 1969 formula components (population, tax effort, fiscal discipline), horizontal imbalance reduction through special category states, predecessor to Finance Commission criteria, limitations in addressing backwardness
  • (d) Industrial deceleration causes: Third Plan crisis, 1965 war, droughts, forex crisis, licence-permit raj intensification, public sector inefficiency, technological stagnation, savings-investment gap
  • (e) Poverty measurement distinction: Absolute (fixed consumption basket, Tendulkar line ₹27/₹33 rural/urban 2011-12) vs. Relative (income distribution, Gini-based), India's hybrid approach with multidimensional indices

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness25%12.5Precise definitions across all five parts: distinguishes forced vs. induced commercialisation in (a); accurately contrasts guarantee systems' financial mechanisms in (b); correctly identifies Gadgil formula's population-weighted components in (c); names specific policy failures (MRTP, FERA) in (d); clearly differentiates absolute headcount ratio from relative inequality measures in (e)Basic understanding of concepts with minor errors: vague on guarantee system differences, conflates Gadgil with subsequent Finance Commissions, lists but doesn't explain industrial deceleration causes, incomplete distinction of poverty measuresFundamental conceptual errors: treats commercialisation as voluntary, confuses old/new guarantees, misidentifies Gadgil formula purpose, attributes industrial slowdown solely to external factors, cannot distinguish absolute from relative poverty
Diagram / model10%5Effective use of tabular comparison for guarantee systems (b) or poverty measures (e); flow diagram showing colonial market integration (a); or schematic of Gadgil formula weights (c) where space permitsMentions need for comparison without visual representation; describes structures textually where diagram would aid clarityNo attempt at visual representation even where clearly applicable; dense text without structural organization
Quantitative reasoning15%7.5Specific data points: railway guarantee burden figures (₹50 crore+ annual drain), Gadgil formula weights (60% population, 10% tax effort etc.), industrial growth rate decline (7.1% to 3.5%), poverty line amounts (Tendulkar: ₹816/₹1000 monthly 2011-12), BPL percentagesRound figures or approximate ranges without precision; mentions 'decline' or 'increase' without specific percentagesNo quantitative data; purely qualitative description missing empirical anchors essential for economic answers
Indian / empirical examples25%12.5Rich empirical grounding: specific regions for commercialisation (Bengal indigo, Bombay cotton, Bihar opium); railway lines (GIPR, EIR); states benefiting from Gadgil (Nagaland, J&K special category); industries affected (textiles, steel); Planning Commission vs. Rangarajan Committee poverty estimatesGeneric references without specificity: mentions 'cash crops' without naming, 'some states' without examples, 'manufacturing' without sectoral detailNo Indian examples; abstract treatment applicable to any country; misses colonial specificity essential for (a) and (b)
Policy implication25%12.5Critical policy insights: colonial commercialisation's famine vulnerability legacy; railway nationalization lessons for infrastructure; Gadgil's evolution into 14th FC principles; industrial deceleration's influence on 1980s liberalization debates; India's shift to multidimensional poverty index (MPI) and debates around Tendulkar methodologyBrief concluding statements without analytical depth; mentions 'lessons learned' without specifying what or for whomNo policy implications; purely descriptive treatment; misses contemporary relevance of historical economic policies

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 II