Location of Repository

The historical roots of India’s service-led development: a sectoral analysis of Anglo-Indian productivity differences, 1870-2000

By Stephen Broadberry and Bishnupriya Gupta

Abstract

Overall labour productivity in India was already only around 15 per cent of the UK level between the early 1870s and the late 1920s. Between 1929 and 1950 India fell further behind and remained at around 10 per cent of the UK level until the 1970s. India has been catching-up since the 1970s, but by the end of the twentieth century was still further behind than in the late nineteenth century. Agriculture has played an important role in India’s relative decline to 1950 and subsequent delay in catching up, since comparative India/UK labour productivity in this sector has declined continuously and agriculture still accounts for around two-thirds of employment in India. Comparative India/UK labour productivity in industry has fluctuated around a level of around 15 per cent. The only sector to exhibit trend improvement in comparative India/UK labour productivity over the long run is services, rising from around 15 per cent to around 30%. India’s recent emergence as a dynamic service-led economy appears to have long historical roots

Topics: HC, DS, DA
Publisher: University of Warwick, Department of Economics
Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1399

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (2007). Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”, (unpublished paper, doi
  2. (1968). Agriculture, Fisheries and Food doi
  3. (1997). Anglo-German Productivity Differences 1870-1990: A Sectoral Analysis”, doi
  4. (1988). British Historical Statistics, Cambridge: doi
  5. (1954). Fifth Census of Indian Manufactures,
  6. (1997). Forging Ahead, Falling Behind and Catching-Up: A Sectoral Analysis doi
  7. (1998). How did the United States and Germany Overtake Britain? A Sectoral Analysis of Comparative Productivity Levels, 1870-1990”, doi
  8. (1953). Indian official sources Central Statistical Organisation
  9. (1993). Manufacturing and the Convergence Hypothesis: What the Long-Run Data Show”, doi
  10. (2003). Measuring British Decline: Direct versus LongSpan Income Measures”, doi
  11. (1995). Monitoring the World Economy, 1820-1992, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
  12. (1983). National Income”, doi
  13. (1939). official sources Board of Trade
  14. (2006). Productivity, Tradability, and the Long-Run Price Puzzle”, doi
  15. (2003). Relative Per Capita Income Levels in the United Kingdom and the United States since 1870: Reconciling Time-Series Projections and Direct-Benchmark Estimates”, doi
  16. (2004). Relative U.K./U.S. Output Reconsidered: A Reply to Professor Broadberry”, doi
  17. (1956). Report on the Census of Production for 1951, London: HMSO. Central Statistical Office (various years), Annual Abstract of Statistics,
  18. (1939). Statistical Abstract for British India, with Statistics, where available, relating to certain Indian States from 1927-28 to 1936-37,
  19. (1999). The Dynamics of Asian Manufacturing: A Comparative Perspective, 1963-1993”, Eindhoven: Eindhoven Centre for Innovation Studies.
  20. (1964). The Purchasing-Power Parity Doctrine: A Reappraisal”, doi
  21. (1993). The Sectoral Productivity Performance of Japan and the United States, 1885-1990”, doi
  22. (2003). The World Economy: Historical Statistics, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. doi
  23. (1964). Theoretical Notes on Trade Problems”, doi
  24. (1951). Wholesale Prices in 1950”, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.