Economics 2024 Paper II 50 marks Highlight

Q3

(a) Highlight the role of MSMEs in Indian Economy. What steps have been taken by the Government to enhance its contribution ? (20 marks) (b) Describe the trend in the growth rate of national income in India from 1950 to 1980 and its impact on poverty. (15 marks) (c) Discuss the inadequacies in the process of industrialisation in the pre-liberalised India. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) भारतीय अर्थव्यवस्था में एम एस एम ई (सूक्ष्म, लघु, मध्यम उद्यमों) की भूमिका पर प्रकाश डालिए । इसके योगदान को बढ़ाने के लिए सरकार ने कौन से कदम उठाये हैं ? (20 अंक) (b) वर्ष 1950 से 1980 के दौरान भारत में राष्ट्रीय आय की वृद्धि-दर की प्रवृत्ति तथा इसका गरीबी पर पड़ने वाले प्रभाव की विवेचना कीजिए । (15 अंक) (c) उदारीकरण से पूर्व भारत में औद्योगीकरण की प्रक्रिया में अपर्याप्तताओं का वर्णन कीजिए । (15 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Economics questions

Directive word: Highlight

This question asks you to highlight. 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 'highlight' for part (a) demands focused emphasis on key aspects with supporting evidence, while 'describe' (b) and 'discuss' (c) require analytical narration and critical examination respectively. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, with 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction linking MSMEs to industrialisation and growth; body addressing each sub-part sequentially with data and policy specifics; conclusion synthesising how post-1980 reforms addressed pre-liberalisation inadequacies.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): MSME contribution to GDP (approx. 30%), employment generation (11 crore+ jobs), export share (45%+), and regional dispersal of industrial activity; specific schemes like PMEGP, MUDRA, Credit Guarantee Fund, ZED certification, and recent MSME Champions Portal
  • Part (b): Trend of 'Hindu rate of growth' (3.5% average 1950-1980) with stagnation in 1960s, slight rise in 1970s; sectoral composition shift from agriculture; poverty reduction limited due to jobless growth and inequality (Ahluwalia's findings on rural poverty persistence)
  • Part (c): Structural inadequacies: capital-intensive heavy industry bias (Mahalanobis model), neglect of consumer goods, licensing regime (MRTP, FERA) inefficiencies, public sector inefficiency, import substitution inefficacy, and regional imbalance (Dandekar-Rath thesis on concentration)
  • Inter-linkage: How MSME neglect in pre-liberalisation period (reserved list inefficiencies) contrasts with post-1991 and post-2015 policy emphasis
  • Critical evaluation: Successes and continuing challenges of MSME policies (credit gap, delayed payments, technology obsolescence); assessment of whether growth-poverty relationship was purely statistical or policy-induced

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness22%11Precise definitions of MSME classification (investment-based post-2018 revision), accurate distinction between organised/unorganised sector, correct interpretation of 'Hindu rate of growth', and nuanced understanding of Mahalanobis-Feldman model vs. actual industrialisation outcomesBroadly correct concepts but conflates MSME with informal sector, vague reference to 'slow growth' without period specificity, or describes industrial policy without analytical frameworkFundamental errors such as confusing MSME with cottage industries only, misdating liberalisation, or attributing 1950s strategy to post-1980 period
Diagram / model14%7Mahalanobis two-sector model diagram showing optimal capital allocation; or Lewis dual-sector model applied to MSME labour absorption; trend graph of GDP growth 1950-1980 with Plan period markers; clear, labelled, and explicitly interpretedSimple growth trend line without sectoral breakdown, or mentions models without graphical representationNo diagrams where clearly applicable, or incorrect/inverted diagrams showing wrong relationships
Quantitative reasoning18%9Specific data: MSME share in GDP (~29%), employment (11.5 crore), credit flow targets (20% priority sector); decadal growth rates (1950s: 4%, 1960s: 3.5%, 1970s: 3.6%, 1980s acceleration); poverty headcount ratios (1950s: ~50% to 1980s: ~45% with little change); industrial growth rates by sectorRounded figures without period specificity, or general statements like 'MSMEs contribute significantly' without percentagesNo quantitative evidence, or fabricated/incorrect statistics that contradict established data (e.g., claiming 10% growth in 1970s)
Indian / empirical examples24%12Committee references (Karve 1955, Abid Hussain 1997, Nayak 2018); specific sectoral MSME success (Tirupur textiles, Moradabad brass, Ludhiana cycle parts); state-wise industrial distribution; empirical studies (Ahluwalia 1974 on poverty, Nagaraj on industrial growth, Bhalotra on welfare)Generic examples like 'Khadi sector' without specificity, or mentions committees without their substantive recommendationsNo Indian empirical grounding, or inappropriate examples (e.g., Chinese MSME model without adaptation to Indian context)
Policy implication22%11Critical assessment of policy evolution: from protectionist MSME reservation (1956 Industrial Policy, 1967 reserved list expansion) to post-1991 de-reservation, to current enabling framework (Ease of Doing Business, SAMADHAAN, TReDS); evaluates effectiveness and identifies continuing gaps (formalisation, GST compliance burden, credit access)Lists policies chronologically without evaluation, or describes current schemes without connecting to historical inadequaciesNo policy analysis, or uncritical celebration of all government schemes without acknowledging implementation challenges or historical policy failures

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 2024 Paper II