Journal of Indian School of Political Economy

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Critique of Recent Revisions with Base Year Change for Estimation of State Income in India


Affiliations
1 IIM Ahmedabad, India
2 DE&S, GoG, Gandhinagar, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


In the present paper, we have critiqued recent revisions made in the estimation of state income in India consequent upon the change in the base year of the National Accounts from 2004-05 to the new base of 2011-12. We have pointed out 10 major limitations of the whole exercise. The revisions associated with the new base 2011-12 series have serious implications on national and regional accounts estimation compared to the past. We have argued with concrete illustrations drawn from the experience of the Gujarat state that most of these impacts are negative on the quality, reliability, valid usage, interpretation and meaningful analysis of long term trends of sectors and the economy at the state level in the country. These revisions areperhaps not well thought out, carefuland consistent with the fundamental desirable characteristics of descriptive statistics and estimation of aggregates. In some cases they seem to be carried out hurriedly without paying attention to their likely impact on the whole system, processes and personnel involved in collection, compilation and generation of critical estimates at regional level. Our final recommendation is that the recent revisions associated with the new base of 2011-12 series should be abandoned for implementation at the state and district levels in the country till further revision of the base year takes place. In the interim period, let the old base of 2004-05 with the methodology continue at the state level.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • GOI, 1976; Final Report of the Committee on Regional Accounts, Central Statistical Organization, New Delhi.

  • GOI, 2001; Report of the National Statistical Commission, New Delhi.

  • GOI, 2011-12; Education Statistics, 2011-12 for intermediate/secondary/higher secondary/upper primary schools and colleges, Ministry of Human Resources Development website.

  • GOI, 2015; Final Report of the Sub-Committee on Private Corporate Sector including PPPs, CSO, MoSPI website.

  • GOI, 2015; Report on Changes in Methodologies and Data Source in New Series of National Accounts, Base Year 2011-12, June 2015, CSO, MoSPI website.

  • GOI, 2016; Report on monthly returns on mineral production, Indian Bureau of Mines website.

  • Kijima, Y. and P. F. Lanjouw, 2003; "Poverty in India during the Nineties -Aregional Perspective", World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, July 29, DECRG.

  • Shaw, Abhishek, 2013; "Comparing NSSO’s Employment Surveys - A methodological Note", EPW, vol. 48, no. 30, July 27.


Abstract Views: 497

PDF Views: 4




  • Critique of Recent Revisions with Base Year Change for Estimation of State Income in India

Abstract Views: 497  |  PDF Views: 4

Authors

Ravindra H. Dholakia
IIM Ahmedabad, India
Manish B. Pandya
DE&S, GoG, Gandhinagar, India

Abstract


In the present paper, we have critiqued recent revisions made in the estimation of state income in India consequent upon the change in the base year of the National Accounts from 2004-05 to the new base of 2011-12. We have pointed out 10 major limitations of the whole exercise. The revisions associated with the new base 2011-12 series have serious implications on national and regional accounts estimation compared to the past. We have argued with concrete illustrations drawn from the experience of the Gujarat state that most of these impacts are negative on the quality, reliability, valid usage, interpretation and meaningful analysis of long term trends of sectors and the economy at the state level in the country. These revisions areperhaps not well thought out, carefuland consistent with the fundamental desirable characteristics of descriptive statistics and estimation of aggregates. In some cases they seem to be carried out hurriedly without paying attention to their likely impact on the whole system, processes and personnel involved in collection, compilation and generation of critical estimates at regional level. Our final recommendation is that the recent revisions associated with the new base of 2011-12 series should be abandoned for implementation at the state and district levels in the country till further revision of the base year takes place. In the interim period, let the old base of 2004-05 with the methodology continue at the state level.

References