NCERT Class 12 Political Science Chapter 10 Planning And Development Solutions to each chapter is provided in the list so that you can easily browse through different chapters NCERT Class 12 Political Science Chapter 10 Planning And Development and select need one. NCERT Class 12 Political Science Chapter 10 Planning And Development Question Answers Download PDF. NCERT Political Science Class 12 Solutions.
NCERT Class 12 Political Science Chapter 10 Planning And Development
Also, you can read the NCERT book online in these sections Solutions by Expert Teachers as per Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Book guidelines. CBSE Class 12 Political Science Solutions are part of All Subject Solutions. Here we have given NCERT Class 12 Political Science Chapter 10 Planning And Development Notes, NCERT Class 12 Political Science Textbook Solutions for All Chapters, You can practice these here.
Planning And Development
Chapter: 10
POLITICAL SCIENCE
PART – II: CHALLENGES OF NATION BUILDING
TEXTBOOK QUESTION ANSWER
Q. 1. Which of these statements about the Bombay Plan is incorrect?
(a) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.
(b) It supported state-ownership of industry.
(c) It was made by some leading industrialists.
(d) It supported strongly the idea of planning.
Ans. (a) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.
Q. 2. Which of the following ideas did not form part of the early phase of India’s development policy?
(a) Planning.
(b) Liberalisation.
(c) Cooperative farming.
(d) Self sufficiency.
Ans. (b) Liberalisation.
Q. 3. The idea of planning in India was drawn from:
(a) The Bombay Plan.
(b) Experiences of the Soviet bloc countries.
(c) Gandhian vision of society.
(d) Demand by peasant organisations.
Ans. (b) Experiences of the Soviet bloc countries.
Q. 4. Match the following:
| (a) Charan Singh | (i) Industrialisation |
| (b) P.C. Mahalanobis | (ii) Zoning |
| (c) Bihar Famine | (iii) Farmers |
| (d) Verghese Kurien | (iv) Milk Cooperatives |
Ans.
| (a) Charan Singh | (iii) Farmers |
| (b) P.C. Mahalanobis | (i) Industrialisation |
| (c) Bihar Famine | (ii) Zoning |
| (d) Verghese Kurien | (iv) Milk Cooperatives |
Q. 5. What were the major differences in the approach towards development at the times of independence? Has the debate been resolved?
Or
What were the key controversies regarding development in India?
Ans. As we have earlier known that the eve of Independence, India had before it, two models of modern development: the liberal-capitalist model as in much of Europe and the US and the socialist model as in the USSR. These two ideologies fueled the ‘cold war’ between the two super powers. There were many in India then who were deeply impressed by the Soviet model of development. These included not just the leaders of the Communist Party of India, but also those of the Socialist Party and leaders like Nehru within the Congress. There were very few supporters of the American style capitalist development.
The nationalist leaders were clear that the economic concerns of the Government of free India would have to be different from the narrowly defined commercial functions of the Colonial Government. It was clear that the task of poverty alleviation and socio-economic redistribution was being seen primarily as the responsibility of the Government. These differences could not be solved.
Q. 6. What was the major thrust of the Five Year Plan? In which ways did the Second Plan differ from the first one?
Ans. The First Five Year Plan (1951-1956) sought to get the country’s economy out of the cycle of poverty. K.N. Raj, a young economist.involved in drafting the plan, argued that India should hasten slowly’ for the first two decades as a fast rate of development might endanger democracy. The First Five Year Plan addressed, mainly the agrarian sector including investment in dams and irrigation.
Agricultural sector was hit hardest by partition and needed urgent attention. Huge allocations were made for large-scale projects like the Bhakhra Nangal Dam. The Plan identified the pattern of land distribution in the country as the principal obstacle in the way of agricultural growth. It focused on land reforms as the key to the country’s development.
The first plan had preached patience, the second wanted to bring about quick structural transformation by this plan was finalised. The Second Five Year Plan has to carry forward the process initiated in the First Five Year Plan.
Q. 7. What was the Green Revolution? Mention two positive and two negative consequences of the Green Revolution.
Or
Focus the light on Green Revolution and its political fallouts.
Or
Write an essay on New Agricultural Strategy (Green Revolution).
Ans. New Agricultural Strategy or Green Revolution:
The Indian agriculture which has been stagnant and asleep for centuries is now awake and is on the march to the amazement of all concerned. Indian agriculture has witnessed a veritable revolution known as the Green Revolution. Broadly this is the result of the technological breakthrough in evolving seeds of high-yielding varieties. The new seeds have given yields which nobody would have believed some years ago.
Ingredients of the New Strategy:
The new strategy was introduced in 1960-61 as a pilot project in sum districts have assured irrigation facilities. This strategy was designated as Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP). Later, this strategy was extended to other areas and was re-named as Intensive Agricultural Area Programme (IAAP). There were several factors responsible for ushering the Green Revolution in the country. The pride of place, however, goes to agricultural research conducted by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and the farm universities like the Punjab Agricultural University at Ludhiana and at Pant Nagar (Uttarakhand). It is the development of high-yielding varieties of crops, especially the cereals and millets, which have brought about this revolution but there were other contributory factors like inputs and incentives which also responsible for the ‘Green Revolution’.
We may briefly enumerate the factors which were responsible for the agricultural revolution in India.
1. Wonder Seeds: Agricultural revolution is primarily due to the miracle of new wonder seeds which have raised agricultural yields per acre to incredible heights. In 1966-67, High Yielding Varieties (HYV) of seeds were introduced. During 1999-2000, 9.1 million quintals of certified quality seeds were distributed.
2. Fertilisers: In the chemical fertilisers, the three most important elements are nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (NPK). These should ideally be present in a 4:2 ratio for optimum soil fertility. The increased use of chemical fertilisers has played a key role in the breakthrough in Indian agriculture.
3. Multiple-Cropping: Thanks to new seeds maturing early, it has become possible to obtain three and even four crops instead of two from the same plot in a year. This had made a radical change in farm technology in India. Some dwarf varieties of wheat, are suitable for late sowing from mid-December to mid-January. After wheat is harvested in the end of April, the land can be sown with moong “Pusa Baisakhi” which matures in 65-70 days and land could then be used for sowing a monsoon crop. This completes the “Green Triangle”.
4. Modern Equipment and Machinery: Modern machinery and implements like tractors, harvesters, pumping sets, tube-wells, etc., are being used and are replacing the bullocks wherever possible. Being time-saving, use of modern machinery in agriculture is conducive to multiple cropping. By extending and improving irrigation particularly through pumping sets, it has made possible the growing of high-yielding varieties of crops.
5. Extension of Irrigation: The irrigation system of the country has been speedily extended to assure adequate water supply especially in areas where new agricultural strategy has been applied. During the last 10-12 years, there has occurred a remarkable growth of tube-wells, pumped in most cases by electricity.
6. Processing, Storage and Marketing Facilities: These facilities are being improved and extended so that the increased agricultural production is put to profitable use.
7. Improved Credit Facilities: Farm finance is now being given more attention so that the farmer is not handicapped in efficiently carrying on his operations. The share of institutional credit in meeting the credit requirements of the agricultural sector has of late been rising rapidly. The establishment in 1963, and later the remarkable spurt in the lending operations of Agricultural Refinance and Development Corporation (merged in NABARD, since July 1982) and the nationalisation of 14 major commercial banks in 1969 and six more in April 1980 and the establishment of regional rural banks in recent years have given further stimulus to the extension of credit facilities to the farm sector.
It may be emphasised as Prof. M.L. Dantwala has observed that the Green Revolution is technological rather than institutional, i.e., it is due to the adoption of modern technology rather than to land reforms.
Q. 8. State the main arguments in the debate that ensued between industrialisation and agricultural development at the time of the Second Five Year Plan.
Ans. The main agruments in the debate that ensued between industrialisation and agricultural development were as given below:
(i) It was argued that without a drastic increase in industrial production these could be no eradication of poverty. They argued that Indian planning did have an agrarian strategy to boost the production of food grains. They stated that the land reforms and distribution of resources among the poor failed due to its non-implementation because the landowning classes had social and political power.
(ii) In favour of agricultural development JC Kumarappa and other Gandhian economists put greater emphasis on rural industrialisation. Chaudhary Charan Singh a Congress leader at that time, favoured the case for keeping agriculture at the centre of planning in India because the planning was leading to creation of prosperity in urban and industrial section at the expense of the farmers and rural population.
Q. 9. “Indian policy makers made a mistake by emphasising the role of state in the economy. India could have developed much better if private sector was allowed a free play right from the beginning”. Give arguments for or against this proposition.
Or
What is mixed economy?
Or
Why do you say Indian Economy is mixed economy?
Ans. India did not accept the two known paths of development. It did not accept the capitalist model of development in which development was left entirely to the private sector, nor did it follow the socialist model in which private property was abolished and all the production was controlled by the state. Elements from both these models were taken and mixed together in India. That is why it was described as ‘mixed economy’. Much of the agriculture, trade and industry were left in private hands. The state controlled key (heavy) industry, provided industrial infrastructure, regulated trade and made some crucial interventions in agriculture.
A mixed model like this was open to criticism from the both sides-the left and the right. Some critics argued that the planners refused to provide the private sector with enough space and the stimulus to grow. The enlarged public sector provided powerful vested interests that created enough hurdles for private capital, especially by way of installing systems of licenses and permits for investment.
Then there were critics who thought that the state did not do enough. They pointed out that the state did not spend any significant amount for public education and healthcare. The state intervened only in those areas where the private sector to make profit. Poverty did not decline substantially during this period; even when the proportion of the poor reduced, their numbers kept going up.
Some writers argued that the planners refused to provide the private sector with enough space and the stimulus to grow. The enlarged public sector produced powerful visited interest that created enough hurdles for private capital especially by way of installing systems of licences and permits for investment. The policy of state restricts import of goods and could be produced in the domestic market with little or no competition left the private sector with no incentive to improve their products and make them cheaper.
There were critics who pointed out that the state did not spend any significant amount for public education and health care. The state intervened only to those regions where the private sector was not prepared to go. Hence, the state helped the private sector to make profit.
Q. 10. Read the following passage and answer the questions below:
“In the early years of Independence, two contradictory tendencies were already well advanced inside the Congress party. On the one hand, the national party executive endorsed socialist principles of state ownership, regulation and control over key sectors of the economy in order to improve productivity and at the same time curb economic concentration. On the other hand, the national Congress government pursued liberal economic policies and incentives to private investment that was justified in terms of the sole criterion of achieving maximum increase in production”.
-Francine Frankel
Questions
(a) What is the contradiction that the author is talking about? What would be the political implications of a contradiction like this?
Ans. The author is talking about two contradictory tendencies
(i) national party executive endorsed socialist principles of state ownership, regulation and control. and
(ii) the national Congress government pursued liberal economic policies incentives to private investment.
(b) If the author is correct, why is it that the Congress was pursuing this policy? Was it related to the nature of the opposition parties?
Ans. The author is correct. Undoubtedly it was related with the anti-political aspects.
(c) Was there also a contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress party and its state level leaders?
Ans. Yes, there was a contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress Party and its state level leaders.
