Exam-useful questions from this chapter, grouped by marks, each with a full model answer. Try writing the answer yourself first, then check it against this one.
In CBSE 2026-27, Unit 6 ‘Development Experience (1947-90) and Economic Reforms since 1991’ (Chapters 1-3) carries 12 marks. This whole chapter is in the CBSE syllabus. The UP, Bihar, Rajasthan and MP boards teach from the same NCERT book. The (½) and (1) marks in answers show point-wise marking as in the marking scheme.
1 1-Mark Questions
Q. Define a plan.
Answer: A plan spells out how the resources of a nation should be put to use; it has general goals and specific objectives to be achieved within a specified period of time.
Q. What is marketed surplus?
Answer: The portion of agricultural produce which is sold in the market by the farmers.
Q. State the four goals of the five year plans.
Answer: Growth, modernisation, self-reliance and equity.
Q. What are HYV seeds?
Answer: High yielding variety seeds, which give a large proportion of output but need fertiliser, pesticide and regular irrigation in the correct proportions.
Q. What is meant by a quota?
Answer: A quota specifies the quantity of goods which can be imported.
Q. On what basis, and with what limit, was a small-scale unit defined in 1950?
Answer: By the maximum investment allowed on its assets; in 1950 a unit investing a maximum of ₹5 lakh was a small-scale unit.
Q. What was the purpose of land ceiling?
Answer: To reduce the concentration of land ownership in a few hands, promoting equity in agriculture.
Q. Which three central questions must every society answer?
Answer: (1) What goods and services should be produced? (2) How should they be produced, with more labour or more capital (machines)? (3) How should they be distributed among people?
2 3-Mark Questions
Q. Why did India choose a mixed economy instead of capitalism or Soviet-style socialism?
Answer: • Not capitalism: distribution is by purchasing power, so the great majority of poor people would be left behind; this did not appeal to Nehru. (1)
• Not Soviet socialism: all farms and factories were state-owned with no private property; in a democracy like India the government could not change ownership of citizens’ property that way. (1)
• Mixed economy: a strong public sector with private property and democracy; the government plans and the private sector is part of the plan effort, the best features of socialism without its drawbacks. (1)
Q. Explain growth as a goal of planning. What is its best indicator?
Answer: • Growth is an increase in the country’s capacity to produce goods and services: a larger stock of productive capital, larger supporting services such as transport and banking, or greater efficiency. (1)
• Indicator: a steady increase in GDP, the market value of all final goods and services produced in the country during a year. (1)
• Cake analogy: GDP is the cake and growth is the cake getting bigger; a larger cake can be enjoyed by more people, so more output is needed for a richer and more varied life. (1)
Q. Why was self-reliance necessary as a planning goal for a developing country like India?
Answer: • To reduce dependence on foreign countries, especially for food; at independence food had to be imported from the USA. (1)
• People recently freed from foreign domination naturally valued self-reliance. (1)
• It was feared that dependence on imported food, foreign technology and foreign capital would make India’s sovereignty vulnerable to foreign interference in its policies. (1)
Q. Why was the goal of equity not fully served by land reforms? Give three reasons.
Answer: • Using loopholes, former zamindars kept large areas of land in some regions; tenants were evicted and landowners claimed to be self-cultivators. (1)
• The poorest agricultural labourers (sharecroppers, landless labourers) did not benefit. (1)
• Land ceiling laws were challenged in courts; during the delay landlords registered land in relatives’ names. Land reforms succeeded in Kerala and West Bengal, where governments were committed, but other states lacked that commitment. (1)
Q. Explain how the Green Revolution enabled the government to build a stock of food grains.
Answer: • HYV seeds greatly raised wheat and rice output, and farmers sold a good proportion of it in the market (marketed surplus). (1)
• With enough grain coming to the market, the government could procure it. (1)
• The procured grain formed a stock for use in times of food shortage, so India was no longer at the mercy of America or any other nation for food. (1)
Q. Into which three categories did the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1956 classify industries?
Answer: • First category: industries exclusively owned by the government. (1)
• Second category: industries in which the private sector could supplement the public sector, with the government taking sole responsibility for starting new units. (1)
• Third category: the remaining industries, in the private sector but under state control through licences. (1)
Q. How does import substitution protect domestic industry?
Answer: • Import substitution replaces imports with domestic production (e.g. making vehicles in India instead of importing them). (1)
• Tariffs, a tax on imported goods, make imports costlier and discourage their use; quotas limit the quantity that can be imported. (1)
• Both restrict imports, so domestic firms are protected from foreign competition and can keep their market. (1)
Q. Does modernisation as a planning goal conflict with employment generation? Explain.
Answer: • Yes, it can. Modernisation means adopting new technology, such as new machines in a factory. (1)
• If the technology reduces the need for labour, output may rise while employment falls; the book (Box 2.2) gives this as an example of goals in conflict. (1)
• So planners must balance the two; promoting labour-intensive small-scale industries was one way of protecting employment. (1)
3 4-Mark Questions
Q. Explain ‘growth with equity’ as a planning objective.
Answer: • Growth: a rise in the capacity to produce, i.e. a steady increase in GDP; the cake gets bigger. (1)
• Growth alone is not enough: a country can have high growth and modern technology and still have most people in poverty. (1)
• Equity: benefits of prosperity must reach the poor; every Indian should meet basic needs (food, decent house, education, health care), and inequality in wealth should fall. (1)
• Examples: land reforms (abolition of intermediaries, ceiling) and subsidies for small farmers served equity, while the Green Revolution delivered growth. (1)
Q. What is the Green Revolution? Why was it implemented?
Answer: • Meaning: the large increase in production of food grains, especially wheat and rice, from the use of HYV seeds, which need fertiliser, pesticide and regular water in the correct proportions. (1)
• Why: at independence about 75% of the population depended on agriculture, but productivity was very low (old technology, no infrastructure). (1)
• Agriculture depended on the monsoon and very few farmers had irrigation; colonial stagnation persisted. (1)
• Food had to be imported from the USA; output had to rise for self-sufficiency in food grains. (1)
Q. Compare the two phases of the Green Revolution.
Answer:
| Basis | First phase | Second phase |
|---|---|---|
| Period | Approximately mid-1960s to mid-1970s | Mid-1970s to mid-1980s |
| Region | More affluent states: Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu | A larger number of states |
| Crops | Primarily the wheat-growing regions only | More varieties of crops |
| Reason | Irrigation and money only with affluent farmers | Spread of HYV technology |
(4 × 1 mark)
Q. While subsidies encourage farmers to use new technology, they are a huge burden on government finances. Discuss the usefulness of subsidies in the light of this fact.
Answer: Usefulness (for):
• Farmers see new HYV technology as risky; subsidies were needed for them, especially small farmers, to test and adopt it. (1)
• Farming in India is still risky and most farmers are poor; removing subsidies would widen inequality between rich and poor farmers. (1)
Against:
• The technology has spread and the purpose is served; much of the fertiliser subsidy goes to the fertiliser industry and to prosperous regions, and it burdens government finances. (1)
Conclusion: supporters argue the correct policy is not to abolish subsidies but to ensure that only poor farmers benefit. (1)
Q. Why, despite the Green Revolution, did 65 per cent of India’s population continue to be engaged in agriculture till 1990?
Answer: • As a nation becomes prosperous, both agriculture’s share of GDP and the share of people working in it decline considerably. (1)
• In India 1950-1990, agriculture’s GDP share fell sharply (59.0% to 34.9%), but the population depending on it fell only from 67.5% to 64.9%. (1)
• Reason: the industrial and service sectors did not absorb the people working in agriculture, though the higher output could have come from fewer people. (1)
• Many economists call this an important failure of the policies of 1950-1990. (1)
Q. Why was the public sector given a leading role in industrial development during the planning period?
Answer: • No capital: Indian industrialists lacked the capital for large industrial ventures. (1)
• Small market: the market was not big enough to encourage major projects. (1)
• Socialist lines: the state was to control the commanding heights of the economy, as the Second Five Year Plan put it. (1)
• The private sector’s policies were to be complementary; industry was narrow (cotton textiles, jute, two steel firms), so the state had to build a diversified base. (1)
Q. Explain the role of small-scale industries and how they were protected.
Answer: • The 1955 Karve Committee (Village and Small-Scale Industries Committee) noted their use for rural development. (1)
• They are more labour intensive, so they generate more employment, and give people without much capital a chance to enter business. (1)
• They cannot compete with big firms, so production of a number of products was reserved for them (criterion: their ability to manufacture the goods). (1)
• Concessions: lower excise duty and bank loans at lower interest rates. (1)
Q. Why and how was the private sector regulated under IPR 1956?
Answer: Why:
• The state aimed to control the commanding heights and build a socialist pattern of society; IPR 1956 was the basis of the Second Plan. (1)
How:
• Licence system: no new industry without a government licence. (1)
• Licences were easier in backward areas, with tax benefits and electricity at a lower tariff, to promote regional equality. (1)
• Existing industries needed a licence to expand output or diversify, so that output did not exceed what the economy required. (1)
4 6-Mark Questions
Q. Explain the need for and types of land reforms in agriculture. Also state their results.
Answer: Need:
• Intermediaries (zamindars, jagirdars) collected rent without improving the farm. (½)
• Low productivity forced food imports from the USA. (½)
• Equity required a change in the ownership of landholdings. (1)
Types:
• Abolition of intermediaries: just a year after independence, tillers made owners, so ownership gave an incentive to invest. (1)
• Land ceiling: maximum land an individual could own, to reduce concentration. (1)
Results:
• Some 200 lakh tenants came into direct contact with the government, freed from exploitation; output rose. (1)
• Limits: loopholes, evictions, no benefit to sharecroppers and landless labourers, court challenges and transfers to relatives; success in Kerala and West Bengal, where governments were committed. (1)
Q. What did the Green Revolution achieve for farmers and the economy? What were its risks and how did the government reduce them?
Answer: Gains:
• Self-sufficiency in food grains by the late 1960s; no dependence on America or any other nation. (1)
• Marketed surplus rose, the relative price of food grains fell, and low-income groups benefited. (1)
• The government could procure grain and build a stock. (1)
Risks:
• Disparity between small and big farmers, as only big farmers could afford inputs. (½)
• HYV crops more prone to pests; a small farmer could lose everything. (½)
Government steps:
• Low-interest loans and fertiliser subsidies for small farmers; small farms’ output equalled large farms’. (1)
• Government research institutes reduced pest risk. So the Green Revolution benefited small as well as rich farmers. (1)
Q. Though the public sector is essential for industries, many public sector undertakings incur huge losses. Discuss the usefulness of PSUs in the light of this fact.
Answer: Usefulness:
• At independence private capital and markets were lacking; the government had to play an extensive role in promoting industry. (1)
• By 1990 industry was well diversified, largely due to the public sector; industry’s GDP share rose from 13% to 24.6%. (1)
• Some economists argue PSUs exist for welfare, not profit, so they should be judged by their contribution to welfare. (1)
Problems:
• State firms continued where no longer required (telecommunication, Modern Bread, hotels); no competition meant long waits for telephones. (1)
• Loss-making undertakings were hard to close, draining the nation’s limited resources. (1)
Conclusion: some scholars argue that the state should leave areas the private sector can manage and concentrate on important services the private sector cannot provide, such as national defence. (1)
Q. On what grounds were the industrial and trade policies of 1950-1990 criticised, leading to the new economic policy of 1991?
Answer: • Unnecessary state monopolies: telecommunication, Modern Bread; no distinction between public and private roles. (1)
• Loss-making units: kept running, draining limited resources. (1)
• Misuse of licences: big industrialists took licences to block competitors. (1)
• Permit licence raj: excessive regulation kept firms inefficient; time went into lobbying, not improving products. (1)
• Protection: captive market, low-quality goods at high prices; protection continued even after it did more harm than good. (1)
• Weak exports: inward-oriented policies failed to build a strong export sector; export promotion ignored till the mid-1980s. Together these led to the 1991 new economic policy. (1)
Q. Evaluate the main achievements of the first seven five year plans (1950-1990).
Answer: • Agriculture: Green Revolution brought self-sufficiency in food grains by the late 1960s and a stock of grain. (1)
• Land reforms: abolition of the hated zamindari system; some 200 lakh tenants in direct contact with the government. (1)
• Industry: GDP share rose from 13% (1950-51) to 24.6% (1990-91), with 6% annual growth. (1)
• Diversification: industry no longer limited to cotton textiles and jute, largely due to the public sector. (1)
• SSI and protection: opportunities for people without much capital; indigenous electronics and automobile industries. (1)
• Limits: 65% still in agriculture in 1990, inefficient PSUs, weak exports; so reform became necessary despite real achievements. (1)
5 10-Mark Questions
Q. Describe the main policies followed in agriculture and industry in India during 1950-1990 and evaluate their achievements and shortcomings. (UP Board 10 marks)
Answer: Introduction: India adopted a mixed economy and five year plans (Planning Commission, 1950), with the goals of growth, modernisation, self-reliance and equity.
1. Agricultural policies:
• Land reforms: abolition of intermediaries and land ceiling; some 200 lakh tenants gained; success in Kerala and West Bengal.
• Green Revolution: HYV seeds, fertiliser, pesticide, irrigation; first phase (Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, wheat), second phase (more states, more crops); food self-sufficiency, marketed surplus, buffer stock.
• Subsidies: cheap credit and fertiliser for small farmers; their continuation is now debated.
2. Industrial policies:
• Leading role of the public sector (no capital, small market, socialist lines).
• IPR 1956: three categories, licences, concessions for backward areas.
• Small-scale industry: Karve Committee 1955, reservation, lower excise duty, cheaper credit.
3. Trade policy: import substitution through tariffs and quotas.
4. Achievements: industry’s GDP share 13% to 24.6%; 6% annual industrial growth; diversified industry; end of zamindari; food self-sufficiency.
5. Shortcomings: 65% of people in agriculture even in 1990 (67.5% to only 64.9%); loss-making PSUs; permit licence raj; poor quality in a captive market; weak exports.
Table (share of GDP, %): agriculture 59.0 → 34.9; industry 13.0 → 24.6; services 28.0 → 40.5 (1950-51 → 1990-91).
Conclusion: progress was impressive, but inefficiency and excessive regulation led to the new economic policy of 1991.
6 Source-Based Questions
(A) 1 mark What does the book call the ‘process of getting government permission’ described in the article?
Answer: The licence system; its excessive regulation came to be called the ‘permit licence raj’.
(B) 2 marks Name the policy of restricting imports and state its two instruments.
Answer: Policy: import substitution (inward looking trade strategy). (1)
Instruments: tariffs (tax on imported goods) and quotas (limit on the quantity of imports). (½ + ½)
(C) 3 marks Based on the article, explain one achievement and two shortcomings of 1950-1990 industrial policy.
Answer: • Achievement: protection let indigenous electronics and automobile industries develop, and the public sector made the industrial base diversified. (1)
• Shortcoming 1: excessive regulation through licences (permit licence raj) kept firms inefficient; industrialists spent time obtaining licences and lobbying rather than improving products. (1)
• Shortcoming 2: with imports restricted, producers had a captive market, so they had no incentive to improve quality. (1)
7 Data / Graph-Based Questions
Agriculture | 72.1 | 66.8
Industry | 10.7 | 12.7
Services | 17.2 | 20.5
(In the same period agriculture’s share of GDP fell from 59.0% to 34.9%.)
(A) 2 marks Which sector’s workforce share changed the most between 1950-51 and 1990-91? Show your calculation.
Answer: Change = share in 1990-91 − share in 1950-51 (½)
Agriculture: 66.8 − 72.1 = −5.3; industry: 12.7 − 10.7 = +2.0; services: 20.5 − 17.2 = +3.3 (percentage points) (1)
The largest change was in agriculture (a fall of 5.3 percentage points). (½)
(B) 2 marks Using the data, explain why economists see this as a failure of 1950-1990 policies.
Answer: • Agriculture’s GDP share fell by 24.1 percentage points but its workforce share fell by only 5.3; in 1990-91 about two-thirds of workers were still in agriculture. (1)
• So industry and services did not absorb people from agriculture, though dependence should have fallen considerably as the nation grew more prosperous. (1)