Economics 2022 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Outline

Q1

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Outline the factors that caused decline of handicrafts during British rule in India. (10 marks) (b) Discuss the features of targeted Public Distribution System in India and point out the obstacles in its implementation. (10 marks) (c) Point out the contribution of C. N. Vakil to Indian Economic Planning. (10 marks) (d) Describe the direct and indirect effects on women empowerment through 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments. (10 marks) (e) Examine the impact of land tenure system during British India on Indian agriculture. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक प्रश्न का उत्तर लगभग 150 शब्दों में लिखिए : (a) उन कारकों की रूपरेखा प्रस्तुत कीजिए जिनके कारण भारत में ब्रिटिश शासन के दौरान हस्तशिल्प का ह्रास हुआ । (10 अंक) (b) भारत में लक्षित सार्वजनिक वितरण प्रणाली की विशेषताओं की विवेचना कीजिए तथा इसके कार्यान्वयन में आने वाली बाधाओं का उल्लेख कीजिए । (10 अंक) (c) भारतीय आर्थिक आयोजन में सी. एन. वकील के योगदान को चिह्नित कीजिए । (10 अंक) (d) 73 वें तथा 74 वें संवैधानिक संशोधन द्वारा महिला सशक्तिकरण पर पड़ने वाले प्रत्यक्ष तथा अप्रत्यक्ष प्रभावों का वर्णन कीजिए । (10 अंक) (e) ब्रिटिश भारत की अवधि में, भू-धारण प्रणाली का भारतीय कृषि पर प्रभाव का परीक्षण कीजिए । (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 Economics questions

Directive word: Outline

This question asks you to outline. 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 'outline' for part (a) demands a structured enumeration of causal factors, while parts (b)-(e) require 'discuss', 'point out', 'describe', and 'examine' respectively. Allocate approximately 30 words per sub-part (150 words total), spending roughly equal time on each since all carry 10 marks. Structure each sub-part as: brief context sentence → 3-4 specific points with brief elaboration → concluding link to broader economic impact. Avoid lengthy introductions; prioritize precision and coverage across all five themes.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Deindustrialization factors—machine-made goods competition, discriminatory tariff policy (free entry of British goods, export duties on Indian textiles), disappearance of princely courts as patrons, British capital in railways redirecting raw material exports, and collapse of traditional village self-sufficiency
  • Part (b): TPDS features—targeting via BPL/AAY categories, dual pricing (central issue price vs market price), decentralized identification through state governments; obstacles—exclusion errors, ghost beneficiaries, leakage in PDS supply chain, fiscal burden on states, and interstate disparities in implementation
  • Part (c): Vakil's contributions—Bombay Plan (1944) co-authorship emphasizing state-led industrialization, critique of laissez-faire, emphasis on heavy industry base, and his role in establishing economics as policy science in India
  • Part (d): Direct effects—33% reservation for women in PRIs, mandatory representation in panchayat committees, financial autonomy through taxation powers; indirect effects—spillover to household decision-making, political socialization of women, emergence of women leaders (Sarpanchs), and changed gender norms in rural public spaces
  • Part (e): Zamindari/ryotwari/mahalwari impacts—commercialization of agriculture, shift from food crops to cash crops (indigo, opium, cotton), rack-renting and subinfeudation, debt bondage, and stagnation of agricultural productivity due to absentee landlordism and lack of capital investment

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness25%12.5Accurately identifies deindustrialization mechanisms for (a), distinguishes TPDS from universal PDS with precise targeting criteria for (b), correctly attributes Bombay Plan authorship and Vakil's Keynesian influence for (c), distinguishes between constitutional mandates (73rd/74th) and actual empowerment outcomes for (d), and accurately differentiates zamindari, ryotwari, and mahalwari systems with their specific regional applications for (e)Covers most concepts but conflates TPDS with earlier PDS systems, vaguely attributes Vakil to 'planning' without specifics, or treats all land systems as uniformly exploitative without differentiationFundamental errors such as attributing deindustrialization solely to Indian preference for British goods, confusing Vakil with Mahalanobis, or equating 73rd/74th amendments with 42nd Amendment provisions
Diagram / model10%5Includes a simple flow diagram showing PDS supply chain leakage points for (b), or a schematic of deindustrialization feedback loop for (a), or land tenure hierarchy pyramid for (e); labels are clear and directly referenced in textMentions need for diagram but provides poorly labeled sketch or describes diagram verbally without visual representationNo diagram attempted where one would strengthen answer (particularly for PDS flow or land tenure structure), or includes irrelevant diagrams
Quantitative reasoning15%7.5Cites approximate data where relevant: share of manufacturing in GDP decline (from 25% to 10%), TPDS coverage (~60 crore beneficiaries), women's representation reaching 46% in some states, or land revenue extraction rates (50%+ in zamindari areas); uses numbers to substantiate causal claimsUses vague quantifiers ('large decline', 'many beneficiaries') without specific figures, or cites outdated pre-2013 PDS data without noting reformsNo quantitative backing for any sub-part, or invents implausible statistics; confuses absolute numbers with percentages
Indian / empirical examples25%12.5For (a): cites specific handicraft centers (Dacca muslin, Murshidabad silk, Surat textiles); for (b): references NFSA 2013 reforms or specific state experiences (Chhattisgarh's PDS reforms); for (c): mentions Vakil's association with Bombay University or specific Plan chapters; for (d): cites states with 50%+ women Sarpanchs (Kerala, Karnataka) or MGNREGA-PRIs convergence; for (e): regional specificity (Permanent Settlement in Bengal, ryotwari in Madras/Mumbai)Generic references to 'Indian weavers' or 'some states' without specificity; mentions 'rural women' without concrete empowerment indicatorsNo Indian examples, or anachronistic references (applying post-1947 policies to British period); confuses geographic regions
Policy implication25%12.5For (a): links deindustrialization to post-independence import substitution rationale; for (b): suggests Aadhaar-seeding or DBT as leakage-reduction measures; for (c): connects Bombay Plan to subsequent Five-Year Plan architecture; for (d): proposes quotas in state legislatures as next step; for (e): connects colonial land systems to post-independence land reform challenges and ongoing tenancy issuesBrief mention of 'lessons for today' without specific policy linkage, or generic statements about 'need for better implementation'No forward-looking policy connection, or proposes historically anachronistic solutions (suggesting DBT for British period); treats each sub-part in isolation without thematic coherence on state-market relations

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 2022 Paper II