This article tests whether manufacturing has acted as an ‘engine of growth’ for the Indian states in the post-1990s.Our methodology involves regressing the state domestic product (SDP) growth rates on growth rates of manufacturing. If the coefficient of manufacturing growth is higher than the share of manufacturing in SDP, this is interpreted as supporting the engine of growth hypothesis. The results indicate that manufacturing has acted as an engine of growth in the post-nineties despite its declining share over the period. However, our study rules out the role of scale economies propelling productivity growth in the sector. Our analysis also suggests that it is primarily factor accumulation and not productivity growth that is driving output. Our characterisation of states based on output growth, TFP growth and employment growth suggests that for some states the current trend of growing without creating employment and improving TFP will not be sustainable.
AbramovitzM. (1986). Catching up, forging ahead, and falling behind. Journal of Economic History, 46(2), 386–406.
2.
AbramovitzM. (1994). The origins of the postwar catch-up and convergence boom. In FagerbergJ.VerspagenB.von TunzelmannN. (eds), The dynamics of technology, trade and growth (pp. 21–52). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
3.
BarroR.J. (1991). Economic growth in a cross-section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 407–443.
4.
BarroR.J.Sala-i-MartinX. (1991).Convergence across states and regions. Brooking Papers on Economic Activity, 1, 107–158.
5.
BarroR.J.Sala-i-MartinX. (1995). Economic growth. New York: McGraw Hill.
6.
BaumolW. (1986). Productivity growth, convergence and welfare: What the long-run data show. American Economic Review, 76(5), 1072–1085.
7.
BaumolW.J.BlackmanS.A.B.WolffE.N. (1989). Productivity and American leadership, Cambridge: MIT Press.
8.
CornwallJ. (1977). Modern capitalism: It’s growth and transformation. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
9.
DeLongB. (1988). Productivity growth, convergence and welfare: Comment. American Economic Review, 78(5), 1138–1154.
10.
FagerbergJ. (1987). A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ. Research Policy, 16(2–4), 87–99.
11.
FagerbergJ. (1994). Technology and international differences in growth rates. Journal of Economic Literature, 32(3), 1147–75.
12.
FagerbergJ.GodinhoM.M. (2006). Innovation and catching-up. In NelsonR. R.MoweryD. C.FagerbergJ. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford Handbooks Online.
13.
FagerbergJ.VerspagenB. (2002). Technology-gaps, innovation-diffusion and transformation: An evolutionary interpretation, Research Policy, 31(8–9), 1291–1304.
14.
FagerbergJ.VerspagenB. (1999). Modern capitalism in the 1970s and 1980s. In SetterfieldM.(ed.), Growth, employment and inflation. Basingstoke: MacMillan.
15.
FrancoisJ. (1990). Trade in producer services and returns due to specialization under monopolistic competition. Canadian Journal of Economics, 23(1), 109–124.
16.
KaldorN. (1967). Strategic factors in economic development. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
17.
KaldorN. (1966). Causes of the slow rate of economic growth in the United Kingdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
KathuriaV.RajR.S.N.SenK. (2010). Organised versus unorganised manufacturing performance in the post-reform period, Economic and Political Weekly, 45(24), 55–64.
19.
LevinsohnJ.PetrinA. (2003). Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Review of Economic Studies, 70(2), 317–342.
20.
LoayzaN. (1994). A test of the international convergence hypothesis using panel data, policy research working paper no. 1333, The World Bank.
21.
MaitiD. (2013). Market imperfections, trade reform and total factor productivity growth: Theory and practices from India. Journal of Productivity, 40(2), 207–218.
22.
MankiwG.N.RomerD.WeilD. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 407–437.
23.
MarschakJ.AndrewsW. H. (1944). Random simultaneous equations and the theory of production, Econometrica, 12(3–4), 143–205.
24.
National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS) (2007). Conditions of work and promotion of livelihood in the unorganised sector. Report, Government of India, New Delhi.
25.
OlleyG.S.PakesA. (1996). The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica, 64(6), 1263–1297.
26.
PritchettL. (1997). Divergence, big time. Journal of Economic Perspectives,11(3), 3–17.
27.
Sala-i-MartinX. (1996). The classical approach to convergence analysis. The Economic Journal, 106(437), 1019–1036.
28.
ShinJ. (1996). The economics of the latecomers: Catching-up, technology transfer and institutions in Germany, Japan and South Korea. London: Routledge.
29.
SzirmaiA. (2008). Explaining success and failure in development. UNU-MERIT Working Paper, 2008–013, Maastricht.
30.
SzirmaiA. (2012). Industrialisation as an engine of growth in developing countries, 1950–2005. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(4), 406–420.
31.
SzirmaiA.VerspagenB. (2010). Is manufacturing still an engine of growth in developing countries? Paper for the 31st General Conference of the International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, St Gallen, Switzerland, 22–27August, 2010.
32.
TempleJ. (1999). The newgrowth evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(1), 112–156.
33.
VerspagenB. (1991). A new empirical approach to catching up or falling behind. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 2(2), 359–380.
34.
YoungA. (1928). Increasing returns and economic progress. The Economic Journal, 38(152), 527–542.
35.
WooldridgeJ.M. (1995). Score diagnostics for linear models estimated by two stage least squares. In MaddalaG.S.PhillipsP.C.B.SrinivasanT.N. (eds), Advances in econometrics and quantitative economics: Essays in honor of Professor C.R. Rao (pp.66–87). Oxford: Blackwell.
