Q1 · UPPSC PCS Mains 2018 · GS III · 8 marks · ~125 words in the hall · 2 min read

Q2 →

Evaluate the effects of globalization on industrial development in India.

Topic: Economic planning and NITI Aayog. Syllabus: Economic planning in India: objectives and achievements. Role of NITI Aayog, Pursuit of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Same official PYQ from year-wise 2018 and Economic planning and NITI Aayog.

Revision summary

1991 reforms and WTO entry opened Indian industry to trade, capital, and technology. Autos, pharma, telecom, and organised engineering gained FDI, quality, and exports. MSMEs in labour-intensive lines faced cheap imports and informal labour. Factory growth clustered in a few belts; manufacturing’s GDP share stayed modest. The effect is mixed capability, not uniform industrialisation.

Model answer

Introduction

Globalization, after the 1991 reforms and WTO entry, opened Indian industry to trade, capital, and technology. Evaluation must weigh faster output, exports, and modern sectors against import pressure on small units, regional clustering, and weaker labour protection.

Body

Gains for industry

  • Liberalisation cut industrial licensing and allowed FDI, which modernised automobiles, telecom equipment, pharmaceuticals, and information-technology-enabled manufacturing.
  • Export orientation and global value chains raised quality standards, scale in steel, chemicals, and engineering, and access to imported capital goods.
  • Special Economic Zones, later Make in India, and services–industry linkages pulled some clusters into world markets and raised productivity in organised factories.
  • Competition forced a section of Indian firms to invest in R&D, branding, and process control rather than sheltered inefficiency.

Costs and unevenness

  • Cheap imports, especially after China’s WTO accession, squeezed labour-intensive small and cottage units in toys, electronics assembly, and some textiles.
  • Industry concentrated in a few coastal and metro belts; inland and eastern States gained less factory employment.
  • Informalisation, contract labour, and weaker collective bargaining rose even where organised output grew.
  • Environmental load and land conflicts around large projects are part of the same opening, not a side-effect that can be ignored.

Balanced reading

  • Globalization did not de-industrialise India as a whole; manufacturing’s share of GDP stayed modest while services raced ahead, which is itself an incomplete industrial transition.
  • The effect is therefore mixed: capability and export in a few sectors, fragility for MSMEs without credit, design, and logistics support.

Flow diagram

flowchart TD
  G[Globalization 1991 WTO] --> P[FDI tech exports]
  G --> N[Import pressure MSME]
  G --> R[Regional clustering]
  P --> I[Industrial development mixed]
  N --> I
  R --> I

Conclusion

Globalization raised technology, FDI, and export capacity in selected industries, but it also exposed small units to import competition and left factory jobs regionally uneven. The evaluation is therefore not a simple success story: industrial development improved where firms could plug into world markets, and lagged where policy did not cushion MSMEs, skills, and infrastructure.

Quick related

Students also ask

PYQ trend

When UPSC asked this

Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.

  1. 2018 · Q2 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

    Describe the targets of energy generation through renewable energy sources in accordance with National Energy Policy 2017 drafted by NITI Aayog.

    View answer →

  2. 2018 · Q3 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

    Throw light on the ‘Pursuit of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in India’.

    View answer →

  3. 2018 · Q4 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

    What is Pradhanmantri Kisan Sampada (SAMPADA) Yojana? Mention its objectives and provisions.

    View answer →

  4. 2018 · Q9 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

    Elaborate on the ‘National Defence Council’ of India.

    View answer →

  5. 2018 · Q10 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

    What is the Public Private Partnership Model in defence?

    View answer →

  6. 2018 · Q11 · UPGS3 · 12 marks

    Examine the major provisions of U.P. Skill Development Mission. Mention the status of its implementation.

    View answer →

  7. 2018 · Q12 · UPGS3 · 12 marks

    Write a note on the “Problem of Equilibrium between Economic Development and Carbon Emission.”

    View answer →

  8. 2018 · Q15 · UPGS3 · 12 marks

    Explain the inter-regional disparities in economic development of Uttar Pradesh and discuss the factors acting as obstacles in the development of backward regions.

    View answer →

More from this paper

Q2 · UPSC Mains 2018 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

Describe the targets of energy generation through renewable energy sources in accordance with National Energy Policy 2017 drafted by NITI Aayog.

Economic planning and NITI Aayog

NITI Aayog’s 2017 draft NEP folds existing RE and climate pledges into one energy frame. 175 GW by 2022: 100 GW solar, 60 GW wind, 10 GW bio-power, 5 GW small hydro. About 40 per cent non-fossil electricity capacity by 2030 is the Paris-linked target. 24×7 power for all and village electrification are the access companions. Corridors, bidding, and must-run status turn capacity targets into generation.

Q3 · UPSC Mains 2018 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

Throw light on the ‘Pursuit of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in India’.

Economic planning and NITI Aayog

SDGs are seventeen 2030 UN goals; India maps them onto existing Union and State schemes. NITI Aayog coordinates and publishes the SDG India Index; MoSPI builds indicators. Poverty, health, education, water, energy, and climate goals ride on named flagships. Large inter-State gaps remain on nutrition, learning, and air. Pursuit is federal delivery, not a separate UN ministry.

Q4 · UPSC Mains 2018 · UPGS3 · 8 marks

What is Pradhanmantri Kisan Sampada (SAMPADA) Yojana? Mention its objectives and provisions.

Economic planning and NITI Aayog

SAMPADA is MoFPI’s 2017 umbrella for agro-marine processing and clusters. It funds infrastructure, not a universal farmer cash transfer. Objectives: cut wastage, raise processing and farmer income, create jobs and safe surplus. Components: Mega Food Parks, cold chain, unit expansion, clusters, linkages, labs, HR. About ₹6,000 crore was the original 2016–20 Union outlay.

Toppers' copies

Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.