Contrast the Industrial Policy of 1980 with that of 1991 with respect to small enterprises in India.

by

Contrasting Industrial Policies of 1980 and 1991: Focus on Small Enterprises in India

Introduction:

India’s industrial policies have significantly shaped its economic landscape. The Industrial Policy Resolution of 1980 (IPR 1980) and the liberalization policies initiated in 1991 represent distinct approaches to industrial development, particularly concerning small enterprises (SMEs). IPR 1980, adopted during a period of socialist-leaning economic planning, emphasized state control and protectionism. In contrast, the 1991 policy shift embraced liberalization, privatization, and globalization (LPG), leading to a dramatically different environment for SMEs. This analysis will contrast these two policies focusing specifically on their impact on the small enterprise sector in India.

Body:

1. Regulatory Framework:

  • IPR 1980: This policy continued the trend of reserving certain industries exclusively for the public sector and licensing requirements for others, including many SME-related sectors. This created a complex bureaucratic process, hindering the growth of SMEs. Entry barriers were high, limiting competition and innovation. While it aimed to promote small-scale industries through subsidies and reservations, the implementation was often inefficient and riddled with corruption.

  • 1991 Policy: The 1991 policy significantly deregulated the industrial sector. De-licensing, reduced procedural hurdles, and a simplified licensing system made it easier for SMEs to establish and operate. The emphasis shifted from state control to market-driven growth, fostering competition and encouraging entrepreneurship. However, this also meant increased vulnerability for SMEs facing competition from larger domestic and multinational corporations.

2. Access to Finance:

  • IPR 1980: Access to credit for SMEs remained limited under this policy. Formal financial institutions were often reluctant to lend to small businesses due to perceived higher risks. The government provided some support through subsidized credit schemes, but these were often insufficient and inefficiently distributed.

  • 1991 Policy: The 1991 reforms aimed to improve access to finance for SMEs through various initiatives. The development of specialized financial institutions catering to SMEs, along with the encouragement of private sector participation in lending, broadened the avenues for credit. However, challenges related to collateral requirements and credit information gaps persisted. The emergence of microfinance institutions partially addressed this gap, although issues of over-indebtedness and ethical concerns have also arisen.

3. Technological Upgradation:

  • IPR 1980: Technological advancement for SMEs was relatively slow under this policy. The focus was on protecting existing industries rather than promoting technological innovation. Limited access to technology and capital hindered the adoption of modern production techniques.

  • 1991 Policy: The liberalization policy facilitated technology transfer and adoption by SMEs. Increased foreign investment brought in advanced technologies, and the opening up of markets encouraged SMEs to upgrade their production processes to remain competitive. However, the rapid technological changes also presented challenges for SMEs lacking the resources to adapt quickly.

4. Export Orientation:

  • IPR 1980: Export promotion for SMEs was limited under this policy. The focus was primarily on domestic market protection. Export procedures were cumbersome, and limited access to international markets hindered the growth of export-oriented SMEs.

  • 1991 Policy: The 1991 reforms significantly boosted export orientation for SMEs. Export promotion schemes, simplification of export procedures, and the opening up of international markets provided significant opportunities for SMEs to expand their reach. However, competition in the global market also presented new challenges.

Conclusion:

The Industrial Policy of 1980 and the 1991 reforms represent contrasting approaches to industrial development in India, with significantly different implications for SMEs. While IPR 1980 aimed for protection and state-led growth, often resulting in inefficiency and limited competition, the 1991 policy fostered a more dynamic and competitive environment. However, the liberalization also brought challenges for SMEs, including increased competition and the need for rapid technological adaptation. A balanced approach is needed, combining the benefits of market-driven growth with targeted support for SMEs to ensure their sustainable development. This includes strengthening institutional support for access to finance, promoting skill development and technological upgradation, and providing a level playing field through fair competition policies. By fostering an inclusive and enabling environment, India can harness the full potential of its SME sector for inclusive and sustainable economic growth, upholding the constitutional values of social justice and economic equality.

APPSC GROUP 1 Notes brings Prelims and Mains programs for APPSC GROUP 1 Prelims and APPSC GROUP 1 Mains Exam preparation. Various Programs initiated by APPSC GROUP 1 Notes are as follows:- For any doubt, Just leave us a Chat or Fill us a querry––