Scholarlink

<p>District as a unit of planning and development was recognised long back in India. Given the challenges of ‘premature non-industrialisation’ and ‘stagnancy’ in Indian manufacturing, the focus on the&#xa0;district may leverage the manufacturing potential of the country. The initial step in this endeavour should involve comprehending the current status and the evolving trends in each state concerning manufacturing. The analysis is made with respect to manufacturing units and workers using the&#xa0;Third (1990) and Sixth (2013) economic censuses, employing metrics such as Gini Coefficient, Location Quotient, and Local Moran’s I. The Gini Coefficient reveals comparatively higher levels of intrastate concentration in states like Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Arunachal Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Haryana exhibit a similar trend in terms of workers. Overall, there is a rising trend of concentration across all states from 1990 to 2013. At the&#xa0;NIC two-digit level,&#xa0;high intrastate disparities are primarily linked to high technology manufacturing. A&#xa0;majority of the districts depict lower values of the&#xa0;Location Quotient, showing low specialization. Local Moran’s I indicates the presence of a few clusters in the country, and their position remains relatively unchanged in both 1990 and 2013. In the&#xa0;Delhi NCR, clustering with respect to workers is observed to have intensified during the specified time frame.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Manufacturing landscape of India: a district-level analysis using economic census

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月8日

查看全文
  • Surya Tewari

摘要

District as a unit of planning and development was recognised long back in India. Given the challenges of ‘premature non-industrialisation’ and ‘stagnancy’ in Indian manufacturing, the focus on the district may leverage the manufacturing potential of the country. The initial step in this endeavour should involve comprehending the current status and the evolving trends in each state concerning manufacturing. The analysis is made with respect to manufacturing units and workers using the Third (1990) and Sixth (2013) economic censuses, employing metrics such as Gini Coefficient, Location Quotient, and Local Moran’s I. The Gini Coefficient reveals comparatively higher levels of intrastate concentration in states like Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Arunachal Pradesh. Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Haryana exhibit a similar trend in terms of workers. Overall, there is a rising trend of concentration across all states from 1990 to 2013. At the NIC two-digit level, high intrastate disparities are primarily linked to high technology manufacturing. A majority of the districts depict lower values of the Location Quotient, showing low specialization. Local Moran’s I indicates the presence of a few clusters in the country, and their position remains relatively unchanged in both 1990 and 2013. In the Delhi NCR, clustering with respect to workers is observed to have intensified during the specified time frame.