Back to Projects
JOIN WHATSAPP GROUP
Free PSC MCQ 4 Lakhs+
Please Write a Review
Current Affairs 2018 to 2022
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 1
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 2
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 3
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 4
PYQ 1200 Q/A Part - 5
Kerala PSC Indian Economy Book Study Materials Page 129
Book's First Pagelannin in ndia 5.43 used to consider the PSUs as the ‘temples of (i) It was not either ‘direct’ (as we see FDI modern India’. during the reform process) or ‘indirect’ (as the PIS ), but via technology transfer. PhAse-ii (1970—73) (ii) Foreign entities could enter only those With the enactment of the Industrial Policy of 1970 industrial areas which were open for the we see GoI deciding infavour of including ‘private Indian private sector (under Schedule B of capital’ in the process of planned development— the Industrial Policy Resolution, 1956). but not in a big and open way. The idea of ‘Joint The ‘monopoly’ industries under GoI Sector’ comes under which a combination of (some of the most attractive industries partners—Centre, state and private sector—could for the private sector) remained closed for enter the industrial sector. This was done basically, entry. to make private sector come up in areas which It also means, that India failed to articulate were open for them, but due to certain technical an investment model which could tap the better and financial reasons they were not able to take elements of the foreign capital—state-of-the- part. In due course of time the government did art technologies, better work culture and most quit such ventures and such industrial settlements importantly, scarce investible capital. Experts came under complete private control. believe it as a missed opportunity for India. By 1965–66, the South East Asian economies like This is for the first time we see the government Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea inclining on private funding for planned had opened up their economies for both forms of development, but we do not see any private entry foreign investments—direct as well as indirect— in the GoI’s monopoly areas of industrial activities and the governments there ‘decontrolled’ the (which takes place only after the reform process industrial sectors, which were earlier fully under begins in 1991). government controls (it should be noted here that these economies had started exactly the same way PhAse-iii (1974–90) as India had started after Independence). This gave With the enactment of the FERA in 1974 we see those economies a chance to tap not only scarce the government, for the first time, proposing to investible fund into their economies, but the state- take the help of ‘foreign capital’ in the process of of-the-art technologies from the world and world planned development—but not via cash foreign class work culture and entrepreneurship, too. investment—only through the ‘technology Soon these economies came to be known as the transfer’ route that too up to only 26 per cent of Asian Tigers. the total project value proposed by the private The period after 1985 saw dynamism in the sector. Basically, under FERA government area of resource mobilisation— two consecutive tightened the flow of foreign currency inflow Planning Commissions suggested for opening into the Indian private sector, which started up of the economy and inclusion of the Indian hampering the technological upgradation process and foreign private capital in industrial areas and initiation of the state-of-the-art technologies which were hitherto reserved for the government. from the world—the technology transfer route It suggested that GoI to withdraw from areas was put in place to fill this gap. It means that where the private sector was capable and fit to even if GoI tried to include foreign investment function (for example, infrastructure sector) and in the developmental process its entry remained concentrate on areas where private sector would restricted in two ways: not be interested to operate (for example, the