Economy During British Period
Indian economy, which in the early 19th century. had the potential for moving on to the modern stage of economic development, slid back to a state of stagnation in the huna British rule. In the process, it acquired the traits, of an underdeveloped economy. State of Stagnation: The two significant developments that indicate the down-turn from the fairly advanced stage were the movement downwards in the per capita income and deterioration in the productive capacity of the country. Reduction in the per capita income: One striking fact of the emerging scenario of a backward economy was the falling off in the level of per capita income. The various estimates, substantiate the point. One set of estimates made by such eminent persons as Naoroji, Atkinson, Digby, Baring and Barbour and Curzon, for the early years of the British rule to the end of the 19th century, prove without any doubt that the per capita income declined during this period. A similar conclusion emerges from the other set of estimates made by Surendra Patel and K. Mukerji for the period of British rule during the 20th century. Low Living-Levels: The stagnating per capita income was, however, a symbol of the utter poverty of the people. This exhibited itself in many ugly facets of their living. They ate a very inadequate and unbalanced diet. Their clothing was scanty: in fact, many went about in semi-nude bodies. and on bare feet. Their housing was primitive, exposed to all sorts of hazards of winds, rains. animals etc. They had to undergo back-breaking toil and suffered ill-health. With underemployment and unemployment widespread and with no social security and exploitative zamindari system and administration, they lived a bleak and miserable life. Famines: were very frequent during the British rule and took a heavy toll on life.
Another aspect of their poverty was the prevalence of high birth-rate and death rates. The but rate, for most of the time, remained over 45 per thousand of population, with over 49 int. decades of the 20th century. This rate is considered the biological máximum rate. The death. the rate also remained very high, well over 40 per thousand of the population for most of the period, with over 47 in the second decade of this century. The high birth rate, among other things, was to ensure the survival of some children against the high death rate. Children were considered necessary for work and support for an old parent, ‘there being no social security. The high death rate was caused by: malnutrition, epidemics, lack of medical facilities etc. Still another dismal facet of poverty was the massive illiteracy. After about 100 years of British rule, the literates were a tiny fraction of the population. As per the 1941 census, the literates were only 17 per cent of the total population, excluding children below 10 years. The percentage was, however, still lower for the rural areas and in the case of women. A weakened economy: The stagnant per capita income also portrayed the fact that during British rule, the Indian economy had become incapable of a higher growth rate. This is evident from several of its aspects. With low growth in national income, there was very little that was added to the stock of real capital of the country. The rate of net investment at the end of the British period: remained stuck at a very low level of 5 per cent of national income. The capital stock in fact declined during the Second World War when the British – used the country’s capital equipment very intensively for war purposes with almost no provision for its replacement. The partition of the country into India and Pakistan in 1947 gave a further blow to the country’s productive capacity. For a population of 18 per cent which formed Pakistan, India lost 23 per cent of its territory. India also lost rich fertile lands which grew jute, raw cotton and food grains. The industrial goods, and more importantly for capital goods, India depended upon imports. In the non-agricultural sector, the important activities were those associated with services like trade. money lending, transport, government administration, defence etc. Institutionally, too the economy was put in an iron-clad of backward relations which obstructed growth. The colonial relations gripped the economy in two ways; unequal trade relations with imports of industrial goods and export of agricultural products; and entry of British capital into ant sectors as plantations. The agrarian relations were mostly moulded into- such important sectors as plantations. The production with the help cottage industries where there was not, however, there were areas these areas, i.e., produced for family use. Or there was of production i.e., also either the vices. Unlike in transport and forces engaged in casinos shows important .sectors as plantations. The agrarian relations were mostly moulded into semi · feudalism. In many areas, landlord-tenant relations dominated. However, there were areas like small farms and cottage industries where there was the natural mode of production i.e., production with the help of family labour and for family use. Or there was simple commodity production in some of these areas, i.e., production with the help of family labour but for markets. Alongside, the capitalistic mode of production, i.e., production with hired or wage labour and for the market, also emerged, though on a limited scale, in some areas of agriculture and industries.
Check out the notes for Predominance of Agricultural Occupations