Spatial Analysis of Regional Divergence in India: Income and Economic Structure Perspectives
Two research methods–exploratory spatial data analysis and structural divergence analysis–are used to provide empirical support for the fact that GSDP per capita in 30 States in India continue to diverge in the post-reform period 1993–2004. First, exploratory spatial data analysis reveals the evidence of spatial clustering, such that rich forward States are located near other forward States (High-High Clusters), while backward States are located near other backward States (Low-Low Clusters). The local indicators of spatial autocorrelation suggest that the spatial dependence of GSDP per capita in 30 States in India is dominated by Low-Low clusters throughout the period. Second, structural divergence analysis reveals that the sector’s contribution to the aggregate divergence is led by industry (60.26%), and followed by services (54.34%), while agriculture plays a role of buffer and offsets the rate of aggregate divergence (−11.81%). The positive spatial autocorrelation of income from services and industry persists, but negative spatial autocorrelation of income from agriculture is observed throughout the period 1993–2004. Therefore, the similarity of High-High (South of India) and Low-Low (BIMARU States) clusters location for economy-wise and sector-wise analysis highlights that the aggregate divergence in India is caused by structural divergence.
Key wordsStates of India regional GSDP per capita divergence exploratory spatial data analysis structural divergence analysis
JEL ClassificationO18 R11 C31
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bhattacharya, B. B. and S. Sakthivel. 2004. “Regional Growth and Disparity in India: Comparison of Pre and Post-Reform Decades.” Economic and Political Weekly Research Foundation, Mumbai, India. Economic and Political Weekly. 6 March.Google Scholar
- Chakravorty, S. 2006. Fragments of Inequality: Social, Spatial, and Evolutionary Analyses of Income Distribution. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
- Chakravorty, S. 2006. “The Spatial Dimensions of Structural Reform: Policy, Investment Location, and the Emerging Economy Geography of India.” Report Submitted to the National Science Foundation (Grant no. NSF SBR 9618343). https://doi.org/astro.temple.edu/~sanjoy/nsfreport.pdf (accessed 20.08.2007).Google Scholar
- Datt, R. and K.P.M. Sundharam. 2006. Indian Economy. 53th Revised Edition. New Delhi, India: S.Chand & Company Ltd.Google Scholar
- Kurian. 2000. Widening Regional Disparities in India. Economic and Political Weekly Research Foundation, Mumbai, India. Economic and Political Weekly. February 12 - 18.Google Scholar
- Rao, M. G., R.T. Shand and K.P. Kalirajan. 1999. “Convergence of Incomes across Indian States: A Divergent View”. Economic and Political Weekly Research Foundation, Mumbai, India. Economic and Political Weekly. March 27 - April 2.Google Scholar
- Shetty, S. L. 2003. “Growth of SDP and Structural Changes in State Economies: Interstate Comparisons.” Economic and Political Weekly Research Foundation, Mumbai, India. Economic and Political Weekly. 6 December.Google Scholar
- Subrahmanian. K.K. 2003. Regional Industrial Growth under Economic Liberalization. New Delhi, India: Manak Publications Pvt. LtdGoogle Scholar