General Studies 2021 GS Paper I 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Discuss

Q5

Despite India being one of the countries of the Gondwanaland, its mining industry contributes much less to its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in percentage. Discuss. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

गोंडवानालैंड के देशों में से एक होने के बावजूद भारत के खनन उद्योग अपने सकल घरेलू उत्पाद (जी.डी.पी.) में बहुत कम प्रतिशत का योगदान देते हैं । विवेचना कीजिए । (150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 General Studies questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. 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 'discuss' requires a balanced examination of reasons behind India's low mining GDP contribution despite its Gondwanaland heritage. Structure: brief context on Gondwanaland mineral wealth → multi-factor analysis (policy, structural, operational constraints) → forward-looking conclusion with reform suggestions.

Key points expected

Gondwanaland context: India possesses 17% of world's iron ore, 11% of bauxite, significant coal reserves (Jharia, Raniganj), yet mining contributes only ~1.75% to GDP vs 3-5% in Australia/Brazil
Policy and regulatory constraints: MMDR Act complexities, delayed environmental clearances, auction-related disruptions, federal structure issues with state-centre coordination
Structural challenges: dominance of public sector (CIL, SAIL), low mechanization, underground mining neglect, poor mineral exploration (only 10% of Obvious Geological Potential explored)
Operational bottlenecks: land acquisition hurdles, tribal rights under PESA/FRA, transportation infrastructure gaps, illegal mining issues (Shah Commission findings)
Sectoral neglect: manufacturing-led growth model, service sector dominance, low value-addition (raw ore export vs processed minerals)
Way forward: National Mineral Policy 2019 implementation, NMET funding boost, deep-seated exploration, cluster-based mining, circular economy principles

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Recognizes 'discuss' demands multi-causal analysis of the paradox (rich geology vs poor GDP contribution), not mere description; addresses both 'despite Gondwanaland' and 'low GDP contribution' parts of the question	Partially addresses the paradox but treats Gondwanaland mention superficially or lists factors without linking to GDP underperformance	Misinterprets directive as describe/enumerate; ignores the causal relationship between geological endowment and economic underperformance
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Covers policy, structural, and operational dimensions with accurate data (GDP ~1.75%, exploration coverage, sectoral comparisons); distinguishes between Gondwanaland coal/iron ore vs non-Gondwana minerals	Mentions 3-4 valid factors but with generic statements; minor factual errors or missing specificity on Gondwanaland mineral types	Superficial listing without depth; significant factual errors (confusing Gondwanaland with other geological formations) or irrelevant content on general mining
Structure & flow	20%	2	Logical progression: context → multi-factor analysis (grouped as policy/structural/operational) → conclusion; smooth transitions; 150-word discipline maintained	Recognizable structure but uneven weightage (over-detailed on one factor); minor flow disruptions; word limit slightly exceeded or underutilized	Disorganized or haphazard arrangement; no clear thematic grouping; severe word management issues (substantially over/under limit)
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Specific data points (GDP contribution, reserve percentages, exploration coverage); institutional references (CIL, GSI, NMET); regional examples (Jharia, Odisha iron ore belts, Bellary illegal mining)	One or two generic data points without precision; examples mentioned but not tied to the Gondwanaland-GDP paradox	No data or examples; or irrelevant examples (non-Indian contexts without comparative purpose); fabricated statistics
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Synthesizes factors into coherent diagnosis; offers specific reform measures (NMET, NMP 2019, exploration incentives); hints at strategic importance (Aatmanirbhar Bharat, critical minerals for energy transition)	Generic conclusion ('government should take steps'); no synthesis of preceding analysis; reform suggestions vague or repetitive	No conclusion or abrupt ending; purely descriptive close; contradictory to body content

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 →