It is important for you to note that the ninth Plan aimed at a growth rate of 8 per cent for industry, but realized growth rate was merely 5.0 per cent which was even lesser than the growth rate of 7.3 per cent achieved in the Eighth Plan. In this manner, it may be mentioned that the Ninth Plan was a failure. As against the target of 5.9 per cent for mining, the realised growth rate was hardly 2.5 per cent.
Likewise, achievement in manufacturing was 5.3 per cent as opposed to the target of 8.2 per cent and in electricity, the realised growth rate was 5.5 per cent as opposed to the target of 9.3 per cent.
Ninth Plan allotted Rs. 69,972 crore for industry at 1996-97 prices, but the Tenth Plan discloses that the total allotment to industry in the public sector was Rs. 44,695 crore at 2001-02 prices. If we revalue the suggested allocation of the Ninth Plan of Rs. 69,972 at 1996-97 prices, it comes out to be Rs. 88,730 crore at 2001-02 prices. Comparing it with the public sector outlay of Rs. 44,695 crore, it infers that real expenditure of the public sector was only 50.3% of the proposed outlay. It was hoped that the private sector would fill the gap, but this did not occur.
Reviewing the internal as well as external factors for the strike during the Ninth Plan, the Tenth Plan states:
“The industrial slowdown is widespread, covering all broad sectors, e.g. manufacturing, electricity and mining and all end-use based groups such as capital goods, intermediate goods and consumer goods (both durables and non-durables). The slowdown in domestic and global demand appeared to be a major factor constraining industrial growth. Another major reason has been the decline in investment, noticeably by the private sector.”
The difficulties brought about by internal factors were intensified by the gradual growth of the world economy, which led to a substantial slowdown in manufacturing exports. This infers that failure of the Ninth Plan in industry can be credited to the decline in public sector investment which was not rewarded by an upturn in private investment.
You must take into consideration that analysing the performance of the Tenth Plan, Eleventh Plan mentions the following: “Industrial performance in the Tenth Plan period enhanced to a respectable level of 8.9% from the very low level of growth rate of 4.3% in the Ninth Plan. The revival of industrial growth is a main accomplishment of the policy in current years. However, industrial performance requires to be improved if high quality employment in non-agricultural sector is to be produced. Within industry, the manufacturing sector, explaining for 77 per cent of industrial output has depicted vital growth acceleration in the past two years. This revival of dynamism in industry has to be continued to reverse the unacceptable decrease in the share of manufacturing in GDP that has occurred since 1991. This will also produce more employment opportunities for the burgeoning workforce. The Eleventh Plan targets at double digit growth both in manufacturing as well as in industry simultaneously, it will be critical to enhance the performance of the core sector (Cement, Steel, Coal, Oil, Fertilizers and Refined Petroleum) to make sure that their supply response is sufficient to sustain double digit manufacturing and industrial growth. It may be stated that the Eleventh Plan has set a target of 10-11 per cent growth in industry, both in industry and in manufacturing. In initial year of Eleventh Plan (2007-08) industrial growth was satisfactory, but performance in the year 2008-09 was not satisfactory. However it again enhanced in 2009-10 and 2010-11. Industrial growth plunged in the second, third and fourth quarters of 2011-12. This led to slippage of industrial growth rate to 2.8% in 2011-12. Industrial growth further plunged to only 1.1% in 2012-13.
