Downloaded 80 times
Uploaded byDr. Amit Kapoor
Manipur
1) The document discusses Manipur's economic performance and competitiveness based on various indicators such as GDP per capita, employment, productivity, and industry clusters. 2) Manipur has a factor-driven economy with a GDP per capita of less than $400 and ranks low on prosperity, productivity, and competitiveness compared to national averages. 3) Agriculture, services, and industry contribute around 25%, 40%, and 35% respectively to Manipur's GDP. The state faces challenges in achieving fiscal stability and enhancing competitiveness.
More Related Content
Manipur
- 1. STATE PROFILES –MANIPUR
- 2. ECONOMIC CHALLENGE FORCHIEF MINISTERS IN 2012 Achieving Fiscal Stability Enhancing State Competitiveness • Competitiveness is the only way to achieve sustainable job growth, improving incomes and stable public finances • Creating a clear economic strategy for the state that engages all stakeholders is even more important in times of budget cutting and austerity
- 3. HIERARCHY OF MEASUREMENTOF STATE COMPETITIVENESS INDEX 4 Major Pillars 12 Sub Indices 350* Indicators * Approximate figure
- 4. STAGES OF THEECONOMY Innovation Driven Economies (Per capita GDP 900 to City States (Per capita GDP>1300 USD) 1300 USD) Transition Economies (Per capita GDP 800 to 900 USD) Investment Driven Economies (Per capita GDP 500 to 800 USD) Evolving / Changeover Economies (Per capita GDP 400 to 500 USD) Factor Driven Economies(Per capita GDP < 400 USD)
- 5. STATES ACCORDING TOCATEGORIZATION Microeconomic Competitiveness Categorization Ranks City States (Per capita Incomes >1300 USD) Delhi 1 Goa 2 Innovation Driven Economies (Per capita Incomes 900 to1300 USD) Haryana 1 Maharashtra 2 Gujarat 3 Kerala 4 Transition Economies (Per capita Incomes 800 to 900 USD) Punjab 1 Tamil Nadu 2 Himachal Pradesh 3 Investment Driven Economies (Per capita Incomes 500 to 800 USD) Andhra Pradesh 1 Karnataka 2 Uttarakhand 3 West Bengal 4 Chhattisgarh 5 Sikkim 6 Mizoram 7 Meghalaya 8 Arunachal Pradesh 9 Tripura 10 Evolving/ Changeover Economies (Per capita Incomes 400 to 500 USD) Rajasthan 1 Jharkhand 2 Orissa 3 Jammu and Kashmir 4 Factor Driven Economies(Per capita Incomes < 500 USD) Bihar 1 Madhya Pradesh 2 Assam 3 Uttar Pradesh 4 Manipur 5 Nagaland 6 Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 6. NEAR TERM STATEPROSPERITY PERFORMANCE 9 Gross Domestic Product per Capita real growth rate, 2008-2011 Haryana Low but rising versus India Chhattisgarh Highly Productive and Prosperity Bihar Rising versus India Maharashtra 8 Himachal Pradesh Uttar Pradesh Andhra Pradesh Orissa 7 Karnataka Punjab Sikkim Uttarakhand Arunachal Pradesh Kerala Assam Gujarat Rajasthan Tripura 6 Points Index 57.28 Average All India Tamil Nadu West Bengal Meghalaya All India GSDP Delhi Goa /Capita rate Jharkhand (CAGR) of 6.27 % Mizoram 5 Manipur Madhya Jammu & Kashmir Pradesh All India Average 4 Nagaland of 47,998 Low and declining versus India Rupees/capita High but declining versus India 3 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 Gross Domestic Product per Capita, 2011
- 7. COMPETITIVENESS: UNDERLYING CONCEPTS • Competitiveness is the productivity with which a state utilizes its human, capital, and natural resources • Productivity determines wages and the standard of living – Productivity growth determines sustainable economic growth • Productivity depends on how a state competes, not what industries it competes in • Innovation in products and processes is necessary to drive productivity growth • Only productive businesses can create wealth and jobs. States compete to offer the most productive environment for business • The public and private sectors play different but interrelated roles in creating a productive economy
- 8. MANIPUR PERFORMANCE SNAPSHOT Position Trend Prosperity Productivity Labour Mobilization State of Clusters Type of Economy Investment Driven Top 33.33% of the states 33.33%-66.67% of the states Construction Leading Clusters Agriculture Electricity and gas supply 66.67% to 100% of the states
- 9. MANIPUR COMPETITIVENESS –OVERALL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Prosperity Clusters Gross State Domestic Product per Capita, 2011 Rank: 3 Total Number of People employed in all Factory sector Rank: 5 • In Manipur Rs. 25,591 • In Manipur 3478 • In India Rs. 47,998 • In India 1,15,06,838 • State Difference to India -46.68%. • State Employment to total India Employment (factory sector) 0.03% Growth in Gross State Domestic Product per Capita, 2008-11 , (CAGR) Rank: 4 • In Manipur 4.66% • In India 6.28% Productivity Labour Mobilization Population, 2011 Rank: 5 Gross State Domestic Product per labour force participant, 2011 Rank: 3 • In Manipur 27,21,756 • In Manipur Rs 65,466. • % of India 4.98% • In India Rs 1,21,265 • State Difference to India -46.07% Population Growth, GAGR, 2001-2011 Rank: 1 • In Manipur 2.31% Growth in Gross State Domestic Product Rank: 6 • In India 1.61% per Labour force participant, 2001-11 • In Manipur 5.59% Employment, 2010 Rank: 5 • In India 8.44% • In Manipur 5,75,968 • % India .2025% Average Private Wage in 2008-09, Rank:5 • In Manipur Rs 26,329 Employment growth, annual rate, 2000-2010 Rank: 1 • In India Rs 64,741 • In Manipur 2.84% • State Difference to India -59.33.% • In India 2.05% Private Wage Growth, CAGR, 2000-2009 Rank:1 Unemployment, 2010 (Per hundred People) Rank: 2 • In Manipur 8.68% • In Manipur 11.70 • In India 4.53% • In India 9.39 Change in Unemployment rate, 2000-2010 Rank: 2 • In Manipur 74.63% • In India 41.37
- 10. UNDERSTANDING STATE ECONOMICPERFORMANCE Manipur 8000 7000 GSDP at current price at factor cost in Rupees Crore 6901 6523 6344 6000 5848 5403 5000 5066 4568 4000 3979 3506 3369 3000 3260 3112 2000 1000 0 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 11. CONTRIBUTION OF MANIPUR’SGSDP TO INDIAN GSDP GSDP at current price at factor cost in Rupees Crore 6000000 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Manipur's GDP Indian GDP Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Ratio of Manipur's GSDP to Indian GDP in 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.14 Percentage Terms Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 12. WHAT DRIVES STATEPRODUCTIVITY 3. Proper Policy 1. Overall business 2. Stage of Economy enactment and strong climate conducive to (strong clusters) rule of law growth
- 13. MODEL USED FORANALYSIS Climate for Innovation based local rivalry • Local rules and incentives that encourage investment and productivity e.g. - salaries, Factor - incentives for capital investments, Demand Conditions - intellectual property protection Conditions • Vigorous local competition i.e., - Openness to foreign and local competition; - Sophistication of company operations Access to high quality business inputs i.e., Sophisticated and demanding local - Natural endowments, customers and needs e.g., - Human resources, - Strict quality, safety, and environmental - Capital availability, Clusters of Related standards - Physical infrastructure, and Supporting – Consumer protection laws - Administrative infrastructure, Industries – Government procurement of - Information infrastructure, advanced technology - Scientific and technological infrastructure – Early demand for products and Local availability of suppliers and supporting industries Services. Presence of clusters instead of isolated firms Source: Michael E Porter
- 14. IMPROVING PRODUCTIVITY INBUSINESS ENVIRONMENT Key Issues for States • More power in terms of tax sharing with center • Reduce costs of doing business • Developing training programs which meet the specific needs of the state industrial clusters • Focus on infrastructure investments on the most leveraged areas for productivity and economic growth • Implementing policies to support small growth businesses • Enhancing the state’s skill development and training institutions for the same • Relentlessly improve of the public education system, the essential foundation
- 15. GEOGRAPHIC INFLUENCES ONCOMPETITIVENESS • Influence and access federal Nation policies and programs • Integrate policies and Neighboring states infrastructure with neighbors States • Assist each city area in City Regions developing its own strategy • Connect rural regions with Rural Regions urban areas
- 16. CONTRIBUTION OF AGRICULTURESECTOR TO GSDP 8000 GSDP at current price at factor cost in Rupees Crore 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Ratio of Agricultural GSDP in Manipur to the 26.91 29.56 28.76 28.95 29.61 28.83 26.84 26.05 24.91 23.55 24.86 24.61 total GSDP in Manipur in Percentage terms Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 17. CONTRIBUTION OF MANUFACTURINGSECTOR TO GSDP GSDP at current price at factor cost in Rupees Crore 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Ratio of Manufacturi ng GSDP in Manipur to the total 6.11 6.95 6.24 6.44 6.28 6.10 6.01 6.21 6.19 6.16 6.11 6.09 GSDP in Manipur in Percentage terms Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 18. CONTRIBUTION OF SERVICESECTOR TO GSDP 8000 GSDP at current price at factor cost in Rupees Crore 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 Dec-06 Dec-07 Dec-08 Dec-09 Dec-10 Dec-11 Ratio of Services GSDP in Manipur to the total 50.80 48.81 49.52 47.49 44.61 42.95 42.59 41.92 41.63 41.37 40.34 39.87 GSDP in Manipur in Percentage terms Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 19. COMPOSITION OF MANIPUR’SECONOMY Agriculture, forestry and fishing Services 25% 40% Industry 35% Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 20. COMPOSITION OF MANIPUR’SECONOMY 3000000 2549085 2500000 GSDP in Rs. Crore 2000000 1492375 1500000 1000000 924340 500000 1699 2451 2752 0 Agriculture, forestry and fishing Industry Services Indian contribution Manipur’s contribution Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 21. COMPOSITION0.45 MANIPUR’S ECONOMYIN GREATER DEPTH OF 0.4 Public administration and defence 0.35 Construction 0.3 Manipur /National GSDP share (Percent) ,2011 Fishing 0.25 Electricity, gas and water supply 0.2 Forestry and logging Other services 0.15 Agricuture 0.1 Communication Real states, ownership of dwellings and business services 0.05 Trade, hotel and restaurant Manufacturing Banking and insurance Transport by other means Storage 0 Railways -5 0 5 10 15 20 -0.05 -0.1 Change in contribution of GSDP of Manipur to total Indian GSDP, CAGR (2000-2011) Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 22. STATE PRIVATE WAGEPERFORMANCE 160000 140000 Jharkhand Wage Growth rate 4.53% Average Wages in Rupees ,2009 120000 Uttaranchal Orissa 100000 Maharashtra Goa Average Wage : Rupees 64,741 80000 Chhattisgarh West Bengal Madhya Pradesh Haryana Karnataka Gujarat Meghalaya Delhi Himachal Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 60000 Andhra Pradesh Punjub Tamil Nadu Kerala Rajasthan Jammu & Kashmir Bihar Assam 40000 Manipur Tripura Nagaland 20000 Low and declining versus India Low but rising versus India 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Wage Growth (CAGR), 2001 to 2008 Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 23. LABOUR PRODUCTIVITY 400000 GSDP at Current Prices per labour force participant, 2011 Goa 350000 High but declining versus India Highly productive and Productivity rising versus India 300000 Points Index 57.28 e Averag India All Delhi All India Average of 250000 8.44% Haryana 200000 All India Average of of Punjab Maharashtra Kerala Gujarat 1,21,265 Rupees/Labour Himachal Pradesh 150000 force participant Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim West Bengal Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh Mizoram Nagaland 100000 MeghalayaTripura Pradesh Arunachal Orissa Rajasthan Jammu & Kashmir Assam Madhya Pradesh Jharkhand Manipur Uttar Pradesh 50000 Bihar Low and declining versus India Low but rising versus India 0 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00 12.00 13.00 GSDP /Labor force participant growth rate(CAGR) Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 24. LONG TERM JOBGROWTH 90000000 Uttar Pradesh 80000000 70000000 All India Average of 60000000 2.05% Number of Jobs, 2011 50000000 Maharashtra Bihar 40000000 West Bengal Andhra Pradesh All India average of Madhya Pradesh 30000000 1,62,99,464 Jobs Tamil Nadu Rajasthan /State Karnataka Gujarat 20000000 Orissa Jharkhand Kerala Assam Punjab Haryana Chhattisgarh 10000000 Delhi Uttarakhand Jammu & Kashmir Himachal Pradesh Nagaland Goa Tripura Mizoram Manipur Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya 0 Sikkim 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Losing Jobs Job growth rate CAGR, 2001-2010 Gaining Jobs Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis,
- 25. LONG TERM UNEMPLOYMENTRATE 30 Goa jharkhand 25 s Point Index 57.28 ge Avera India All Below average Unemployment All India Average of - 20 2.12% Rajasthan Unemployment rate 2010 Bihar Unemployment Rising 15 Unemployment rate All India Average of Meghalaya 9.39% West Bengal kerala Gujarat Punjab MizoramOrissa Uttar Pradesh 10 Haryana Nagaland Manipur Tripura Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Above Average Himachal Pradesh Assam Unemployment Sikkim Maharashtra Jammu Tamil Nadu 5 Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh Karnataka Delhi 0 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 Change in Employment rate 1999-2010 Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 26. NEAR TERM UNEMPLOYMENTRATE 30 Goa jharkhand Points Avera 57.28 Index All India Average of - India 25 6.55% All ge 20 Unemployment rate 2010 Rajasthan Bihar 15 All India Average of Meghalaya West Bengal 9.39% Punjab Gujarat kerala Orissa Haryana 10 Uttar Pradesh Manipur Mizoram Nagaland Madhya Pradesh Tripura Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim Assam Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra Tamil Nadu Jammu Uttarakhand 5 Chhattisgarh Karnataka Delhi 0 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 Change in Employment rate 2008 to 2010 Source : Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 27. GROSS AREA SOWNVERSUS IRRIGATED AREA 100000 Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Uttar Pradesh Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh 10000 Gujarat West Bengal Punjab Karnataka Chhattisgarh BiharOrissaHaryana Log of area sown in ‘000 hectares Assam Kerala All India Average Jharkhand 1000 67,41,000 Uttarakhand Jammu & Kashmir hectares Himachal Pradesh India All All India Average Meghalaya Nagaland Arunachal Pradesh Manipur 30,03,000 hectares Goa 100 Sikkim Mizoram Delhi 10 1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 Log of Irrigated Area in ‘000 hectares Source: MOA, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 28. HEALTHCARE Percentage of Totalgovernment Expenditure on Medical, Health 10 Delhi 9 8 7 and Sanitation 6 Goa Jammu & Kashmir Uttarakhand All India Average 5 Manipur Himachal Pradesh 4.02% AssamKerala Meghalaya West Bengal Tamil Nadu Tripura Nagaland Uttar Pradesh Mizoram Rajasthan 4 Gujarat Sikkim Chhattisgarh Karnataka Jharkhand Haryana Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Orissa Punjab Bihar 3 Arunachal Pradesh India All 2 All India Average 1633 Crores 1 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Total Government Expenditure on Medical, Health and Sanitation in Crores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 29. PERCENTAGE OF VILLAGESELECTRIFIED 120 100 100.0 100.099.7100.098.2 98.2 99.9100.0 100.0 100.0 All India 100 96.9 96.4 96.9 97.3 94.4 Average of 88.3 85.8 88.3 84.96 % 80.8 80.6 80 69.2 64.4 62.6 61.3 59.3 60 56.8 57.2 40 31.1 20 0 Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 30. TELEDENSITY 140000 Goa 120000 y = 429.3x + 12630 R² = 0.388 Delhi 100000 Haryana 80000 GSDP per Capita Maharashtra Gujarat Punjab Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Arunachal Pradesh Bengal West MeghalayaChhattisgarh Mizoram Tripura Orissa Uttarakhand 40000 Jammu & Kashmir Rajasthan Nagaland Jharkhand Manipur Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 20000 0 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 Teledensity Source: Ministry of telecom, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 31. DEBT TO GDPRATIO West Bengal 42.8 Prescribed limit according to the Uttaranchal 41.1 growth and stability Pact of EU Uttar Pradesh 43.5 Tripura 42.2 Tamil Nadu 25.5 Sikkim 80.6 Rajasthan 41.1 Punjab 35.2 Orissa 30.6 Nagaland 59.4 Mizoram 109.1 Meghalya 37.3 Manipur 77.4 Maharashtra 25.1 Madhya Pradesh 34.4 Kerala 34.3 Karnataka 24.3 Jharkhand 33.6 Jammu & Kashmir 70.1 Himachal 55.7 Haryana 19 Gujarat 32.1 Goa 35.5 Delhi 13.8 Prescribed limit according Chattisgarh 15.2 to WTO for developing Bihar 39.7 economies Assam 28 Arunachal 115.9 Andhra 30.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 32. RURAL POPULATION VERSUSRURAL POPULATION GROWTH RATES 4.000 Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Bihar Mizoram Manipur Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Rajasthan Chhattisgarh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 2.000 Assam Himachal Pradesh Uttarakhand Orissa Maharashtra Haryana Gujarat Punjab KarnatakaBengal West Tamil Nadu Tripura Andhra Pradesh 0.000 Sikkim 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 Growth rate (CAGR 2001-2011) Nagaland Goa Thousands -2.000 Kerala -4.000 -6.000 Delhi -8.000 -10.000 Population in Rural areas as per census (provisional Data) in Thousands Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 33. URBAN POPULATION VERSUSURBAN POPULATION GROWTH RATES 12 Sikkim 10 Growth rate (CAGR 2001-2011) 8 Kerala Tripura 6 Nagaland Haryana 4 Manipur Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh Jammu & Kashmir Bihar Andhra Pradesh Gujarat Arunachal Pradesh Jharkhand Goa Meghalaya Karnataka Assam Orissa Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Mizoram Delhi Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu Punjab West Bengal Maharashtra 2 Himachal Pradesh 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 Thousands Population in Urban areas as per census (provisional Data) in Thousands Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 34. 100,000,000 120,000,000 140,000,000 160,000,000 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 0 151,726 455,962 561,977 529037 313,446 1069165 906,309 551414 573,741 1406861 822,132 1899624 595,036 2368971 960,981 2,710,051 688,704 6167805 3,091,169 7,025,583 3,414,106 Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis 9134820 16,333,916 419319 8,821,588 Urban Population in 2011 16531493 5,936,538 19603658 10,387,436 RURAL AND URBAN POPULATION IN INDIA 17,316,800 4,388,756 26780516 7,929,292 25,036,946 15,932,171 17455506 6,996,124 Rural Population in 2011 34,951,234 25,712,811 34670817 23,578,175 37552529 17,080,776 51,540,236 34,949,729 37,189,229 20,059,666 52537899 28,353,745 56311788 29,134,060 62,213,676 11,729,609 92075028 50,827,531 61545441 44,470,455 155,111,022
- 35. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE INMANIPUR 80000 68998 67442 63553 70000 61677 60000 52618 51657 Population in Numbers 49278 45526 50000 39761 34499 40000 28139 30000 21779 16014 20000 11164 8099 5674 5125 10000 0 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80+ years years years years years years years years years years years year years years years years years Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 36. RURAL URBAN ANDTOTAL POPULATION 120 Delhi Urban Population as a percentage of total Population 100 All India Average India 67.02% All 80 Goa Tamil Nadu Maharashtra 60 Kerala Mizoram Gujarat Karnataka All India Average Punjab Pradesh Andhra Bengal West Haryana 32.98% MadhyaUttar Pradesh Pradesh 40 Rajasthan Uttarakhand Manipur Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Nagaland Chhattisgarh Tripura Sikkim Orissa Arunachal Pradesh Bihar Meghalaya Assam 20 Himachal Pradesh 0 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -20 Rural Population as a percentage of total Population Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 37. SEX RATIO VERSUSSEX RATIO GROWTH RATES 0.8 Delhi 0.7 0.6 All India Average 940 India females/1000 males Mizoram All 0.5 Nagaland 0.4 Arunachal Pradesh Goa CAGR growth rate 2001-11 All India Average Punjab Kerela 0.3 0.169% CAGR Haryana Assam 0.2 Sikkim Meghalaya Tripura Madhya Pradesh WestAndhra Pradesh Bengal Uttar Pradesh Manipur Himachal Pradesh Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Jharkhand 0.1 Maharashtra Orissa Karnataka Chattisgarh Uttarakhand Gujarat 0 0 200 400 600 800 Bihar 1000 1200 -0.1 Jammu and Kashmir -0.2 -0.3 Sex ratio Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 38. LITERACY RATES VERSUSGDP 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi GSDP per capita at current prices 2011 100000 Haryana y = 1576.x - 73239 R² = 0.254 80000 Maharashtra Gujarat Punjab Himachal Pradesh Kerala 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Orissa Tripura Mizoram 40000 Rajasthan & Kashmir Jammu Assam Jharkhand Nagaland Madhya Pradesh Manipur Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Literacy rate 2011 Source: RBI , Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 39. REVENUE EXPENDITURE VERSUSREVENUE RECEIPTS 120000 Maharashtra Uttar Pradesh 100000 India All All India Average 34190 Revenue Expenditure in Rs. Crores Andhra Pradesh Rs. Crores 80000 Tamil Nadu West Bengal Gujarat 60000 Karnataka Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan Bihar All India Average 34757 40000 Kerala Punjab Rs. Crores Orissa Haryana Assam Chhattisgarh Jharkhand Jammu & Kashmir 20000 Delhi Himachal Pradesh Uttarakhand Goa Nagaland Tripura Meghalaya Mizoram Sikkim Manipur 0 Arunachal Pradesh 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 Revenue Receipts in Rs. Crores Source: RBI , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 40. LITERACY RATES VERSUSPOPULATION 25000000 Uttar Pradesh 20000000 All India Average India All Literacy level of 77.12% 15000000 Maharashtra Bihar 10000000 All India Average West Bengal 67232968 People/state Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu Rajasthan Karnataka Gujarat 50000000 Orissa Jharkhand Kerela Assam Punjab Chhattisgarh Haryana Delhi Jammu and Kashmir Uttarakhand Himachal Pradesh Meghalaya Manipur Tripura Arunachal Pradesh NagalandSikkim Goa Mizoram 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Literacy rates in Percentage terms Source: Census 2011 , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 41. GROWTH RATE INAGRICULTURE VERSUS BANK CREDIT TO AGRICULTURE 20 Gujarat Chhattisgarh Punjab Haryana 15 Andhra Pradesh Tamil Nadu CAGR growth rate in Agriculture 2005-10 Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Orissa Uttar Pradesh Maharashtra Madhya Pradesh Assam Kerala Bihar Bengal West 10 Karnataka Rajasthan Sikkim All India Average of Tripura Goa Himachal Pradesh 9.30 % CAGR growth Uttarakhand Delhi 5 Mizoram Jammu & Kashmir rate Manipur All India Average of India All Nagaland 12,157 Crores/state 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 Jharkhand -5 Outstanding commercial scheduled bank credit to Agriculture in Rs. Crores Source: MOA , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 42. PERCENTAGE OF FACTORIESIN OPERATION VERSUS TOTAL NUMBER OF FACTORIES 16 Bihar Nagaland Tripura Jharkhand 14 Manipur Percentage of factories not in operation 12 India All All India Average of 6198 Factories/state 10 Kerala Andhra Pradesh 8 Delhi Orissa Tamil Nadu Assam Chhattisgarh All India Average of 4.1% factories not in 6 operation/state average Karnataka Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra 4 Uttarakhand Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir West Bengal Gujarat Punjab Haryana 2 Meghalaya Goa 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 Total number of factories Source: ASI , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis, Data as of 2010
- 43. SLUM POPULATION GROWTHRATE (2001-2011) 30 Meghalya Arunachal Population Decadal Growth Rate Bihar 25 Jammu & Kashmir Mizoram Jharkhand Chhattisgarh India’s decadal population Rajasthan Delhi growth rate is 17%. Madhya Uttar Pradesh Pradesh Haryana Uttaranchal 20 Manipur Gujarat Assam Maharashtra Tamil Nadu Karnataka Tripura 15 West Bengal Orissa Punjab Himachal Sikkim Andhra 10 Goa Average change in Kerala slum population is 5 26%. Nagaland 0 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 -5 Percentage Change in the Slum Population Source: MOUA, Data as of 2010
- 44. POLLUTION 500 Delhi Uttar Pradesh 450 Rajasthan SPM Level above 400 is considered dangerous for 400 industrial areas Madhya Pradesh Punjab Bihar Haryana 350 Maharashtra SPM Level (Residential) 300 Andhra Pradesh West Bengal Orissa Gujarat Uttaranchal Chhattisgarh 250 Himachal Assam SPM Level above 140 is Karnataka 200 considered dangerous for Tamil Nadu residential areas Jharkhand Nagaland 150 Mizoram Meghalya Goa Kerala 100 50 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 SPM Level (Industrial Area) SPM is Suspended Particulate matter. The above mentioned limits are are prescribed by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), India. Source: CPCB , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 45. AIR POLLUTION 500 Delhi Uttar Pradesh 450 Rajasthan SPM Level above 400 is considered dangerous for 400 industrial areas Madhya Pradesh Punjab Bihar Haryana 350 Maharashtra SPM Level (Residential) 300 Andhra West Bengal Orissa Gujarat Uttaranchal Chhattisgarh 250 Himachal Assam SPM Level above 140 is Karnataka considered dangerous for 200 residential areas Tamil Nadu Jharkhand Nagaland 150 Mizoram Meghalya Goa Kerala 100 50 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 SPM Level (Industrial Area) SPM is Suspended Particulate matter. The above mentioned limits are are prescribed by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), India.
- 46. CAPITAL OUTLAY BYMAJOR SECTORS Manipur General economic services 0% Social service 36% Economic service 64%
- 47. POPULATION PERCENTAGES INDISTRICTS OF MANIPUR 13.04 6.73 5.15 16.63 18.91 8.83 15.45 5.29 9.97
- 48. MAJOR CITIES OFMANIPUR Capital City v Major Cities Kakching v Mayang Imphal v v
- 49. FACTOR CONDITIONS 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi 100000 GSDP in Rs. Crore Haryana 80000 Maharashtra y = 2567.x - 97812 Gujarat Punjab R² = 0.143 Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Tripura Orissa Mizoram 40000 Rajasthan Jammu and Kashmir Assam Nagaland Jharkhand Manipur Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 Factor Conditions Score Source: MOSPI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 50. SUB PILLARS OFFACTOR CONDITIONS - FINANCIAL CONDITIONS 140000 Goa 120000 y = 5200.x - 24915 R² = 0.750 Delhi 100000 GSDP in Rs. Crore Haryana 80000 Maharashtra Gujarat Punjab Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Tripura Mizoram Orissa 40000 Rajasthan Jammu & Kashmir Assam Nagaland JharkhandManipur Uttar Pradesh Madhya Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 50 55 60 65 70 75 Financial Conditions Score Source: MOSPI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 51. SUB PILLARS OFFACTOR CONDITIONS - PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 2500 Road length per one lakh of Population Delhi 2000 1500 Arunachal Pradesh y = 35.81x - 1554. R² = 0.254 Nagaland 1000 Tripura Assam Manipur Goa Mizoram Kerala Orissa Himachal Pradesh Karnataka Uttarakhand 500 Meghalaya Chhattisgarh Sikkim West Bengal RajasthanAndhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh GujaratNadu Tamil Jammu & Kashmir Maharashtra Uttar Pradesh Bihar Jharkhand Punjab Haryana 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Physical Conditions Score Source: MORTH, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 52. SUB PILLARS OFFACTOR CONDITIONS - COMMUNICATION CONDITIONS 250 Chhattisgarh 200 Teledensity 150 Himachal Pradesh Punjab Tamil Nadu Kerala y = 0.878x + 32.19 Karnataka Maharashtra R² = 0.115 100 Haryana Andhra Pradesh Gujarat West Bengal Bihar Goa Jharkhand Uttarakhand Rajasthan Orissa Manipur Uttar Pradesh Tripura Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Nagaland Sikkim Jammu & Kashmir Madhya Pradesh Delhi 50 Assam 0 45 55 65 75 85 95 105 Communication Conditions Score Source: Ministry of Telecom , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 53. SUB PILLARS OFFACTOR CONDITIONS – ADMINSTRATION 2000 1800 Orissa Delhi Total Number of Government Hospitals 1600 1400 1200 1000 Uttar Pradesh Karnataka Maharashtra 800 Uttarakhand y = 28.91x - 1185. R² = 0.148 Tamil Nadu 600 Jharkhand Rajasthan Gujarat Kerala Madhya Pradesh Andhra Pradesh 400 West Bengal Bihar Punjab Assam Arunachal Pradesh Himachal Pradesh Haryana 200 Chhattisgarh Jammu & Kashmir Nagaland Goa Manipur Meghalaya Tripura Mizoram 0 Sikkim 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 -200 Administration Conditions Score Source: CBHI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 54. SUB PILLARS OFFACTOR CONDITIONS - HUMAN CONDITIONS 14000000 Sikkim 12000000 Population in the age group 15-64 years 10000000 Delhi y = 2E+06x - 8E+07 80000000 R² = 0.429 Chhattisgarh Andhra Pradesh Nagaland 60000000 Haryana Tripura Jharkhand Tamil Nadu Bihar 40000000 Rajasthan Goa Uttarakhand Meghalaya Jammu & Kashmir Kerala 20000000 Gujarat Uttar Pradesh West Bengal Karnataka Orissa Madhya Pradesh Assam MizoramArunachal Pradesh Punjab Himachal Pradesh Manipur 0 Maharashtra 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 -2000000 Human Conditions Score Source: Report on Population , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 55. SUB PILLAR OFFACTOR CONDITIONS- INNOVATION RATING 100 Kerala 95 Mizoram 90 Goa Tripura Delhi 85 Himachal Pradesh Sikkim Maharashtra Literacy rate Nagaland Tamil Nadu Manipur Uttarakhand 80 West Bengal Punjab Haryana y = 0.017x + 75.91 Meghalaya Karnataka R² = 0.000 Gujarat 75 Assam Orissa Chhattisgarh Pradesh Madhya Uttar Pradesh 70 Jammu & Kashmir Jharkhand Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Rajasthan 65 Bihar 60 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 Innovation Score Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 56. DEMAND CONDITIONS 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi 100000 Haryana 80000 Literacy rate Maharashtra Punjab Gujarat y = 1048.x - 4544. Kerala Himachal Pradesh R² = 0.211 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh Meghalaya West Bengal Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Tripura Orissa 40000 Rajasthan Jammu and Kashmir Assam Nagaland Jharkhand Manipur Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Demand Conditions Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 57. SUB PILLAR OFDEMAND CONDITIONS- DEMOGRAPHY 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi 100000 Per capita GSDP at state level Haryana 80000 Maharashtra y = 1048.x - 4544. Punjab Gujarat R² = 0.211 Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Mizoram Tripura Orissa 40000 Jammu and Kashmir Rajasthan Assam Nagaland Jharkhand Manipur Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Demography Source: MOSPI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 58. SUB PILLAR OFDEMAND CONDITIONS- INCOME AND CONSUMPTION 35,000,000 Uttar Pradesh 30,000,000 25,000,000 Maharashtra Total number of households Andhra West Bengal 20,000,000 Bihar Tamil Nadu Madhya Pradesh 15,000,000 Karnataka y = 26229x - 5E+06 Rajasthan R² = 0.143 Gujarat Orissa 10,000,000 Kerala Assam Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Punjab Haryana 5,000,000 Delhi J&K Uttarakhand Tripura Himachal Nagaland Mizoram Arunachal Sikkim Meghalaya Goa Manipur 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Income Distribution Source: Census 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 59. SUPPORTING CONDITIONS 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi 100000 y = 2607.x - 10984 R² = 0.654 Haryana 80000 GSDP/ Capita Maharashtra Gujarat Punjab Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Orissa Tripura 40000 Rajasthan Jammu and Kashmir Assam Nagaland Jharkhand Manipur Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Supporting Conditions Source: MOSPI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 60. SUB PILLAR OFSUPPORTING CONDITIONS- DIVERSITY OF FIRMS 25000 Tamil Nadu 20000 Maharashtra Andhra Pradesh Total number of factories 15000 Gujarat y = 402.4x - 18291 Uttar Pradesh R² = 0.299 10000 Punjab Karnataka West Bengal Rajasthan Kerala 5000 Haryana Delhi Madhya Pradesh Jharkhand Assam Bihar Orissa Chhattisgarh Uttarakhand Manipur Jammu and Kashmir Himachal Pradesh Goa Tripura Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Mizoram Sikkim Nagaland 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Diversity of Firms Index Source: ASI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 61. SUB PILLAR OFSUPPORTING CONDITIONS - BUSINESS INCENTIVES 1200000 Maharashtra 1000000 Outstanding Scheduled commercial bank credit 800000 600000 Chhattisgarh 400000 Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Karnataka y = 5370x - 22486 R² = 0.046 Gujarat West Bengal 200000 Uttar Pradesh Rajasthan Kerala Punjab Madhya Pradesh Haryana Jharkhand Orissa Meghalaya Bihar Delhi Assam Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Arunachal Manipur Tripura Uttarakhand Sikkim Pradesh Goa Nagaland Mizoram 0 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 Business Incentives Source : RBI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 62. STRATEGIC CONTEXT 140000 Goa 120000 Delhi 100000 Haryana 80000 GSDP per capita Maharashtra Gujarat Punjab Kerala Himachal Pradesh 60000 Tamil Nadu Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand Chhattisgarh West Bengal Meghalaya Arunachal Pradesh Orissa Tripura Mizoram 40000 Rajasthan Jammu and Kashmir Assam Jharkhand Nagaland Madhya Pradesh Manipur Uttar Pradesh 20000 Bihar 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Strategic context Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 63. SUB PILLARS OFSTRATEGIC CONTEXT – SUPPLIER SOPHISTICATION 1600000 Tamil Nadu 1400000 Maharashtra Total Number of Factory Workers 1200000 Andhra Pradesh 1000000 Gujarat 800000 y = 20093x - 80534 Uttar Pradesh Karnataka R² = 0.206 600000 West Bengal Punjab Haryana 400000 Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim Mizoram Kerala Rajasthan Madhya Pradesh Orissa 200000 Jharkhand Assam Bihar Chhattisgarh Delhi Himachal PradeshUttarakhand Nagaland Jammu & Kashmir Tripura Goa Manipur Meghalaya 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Supplier sophistication Source: ASI, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 64. SUB PILLAR OFSTRATEGIC CONTEXT- INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT 60 Educational Institutions – Universities per crore of population Sikkim 50 40 y = 0.980x - 49.26 30 R² = 0.650 20 Arunachal Pradesh Uttarakhand Himachal Pradesh Tamil Nadu Chhattisgarh Jammu & Kashmir Goa Mizoram 10 Manipur Rajasthan Tripura Nagaland Karnataka Bihar MeghalayaGujarat Orissa Punjab Maharashtra Haryana Andhra Pradesh Kerala Jharkhand Assam Delhi Uttar Pradesh West Bengal Madhya Pradesh 0 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 -10 Institutional Support Index Source: UGC, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 65. PROSPERITY AND COMPETITIVENESS 90000 Goa Delhi Per capita State Domestic product at constant price 2011 80000 70000 60000 y = 2486.x - 10552 R² = 0.517 Haryana 50000 Kerala Maharashtra Gujarat Himachal Pradesh Tamil Nadu Punjab 40000 Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Sikkim Uttarakhand West Bengal Meghalaya 30000 Tripura Arunachal PradeshMizoram Orissa ChhattisgarhRajasthan Jammu and Kashmir Jharkhand Manipur Assam Madhya Pradesh 20000 Nagaland Uttar Pradesh Bihar 10000 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 66. POLICE OFFICIALS VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 180000 Maharashtra 160000 140000 Number of Police Officials 120000 Uttar Pradesh 100000 Andhra Pradesh Tamil Nadu 80000 Karnataka Jammu and Kashmir West Bengal Rajasthan y = 2830x - 11635 60000 R² = 0.122 Madhya Pradesh Bihar Gujarat Punjab Kerala Haryana 40000 Jharkhand Orissa Assam Chhattisgarh 20000 Uttarakhand Tripura Manipur Nagaland Meghalaya Himachal Pradesh Goa Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Sikkim 0 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 67. PORT INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 60 Maharashtra 50 Gujarat 40 Number of Ports 30 y = 0.225x + 2.814 20 R² = 0.005 Tamil Nadu Kerala Andhra Pradesh 10 Goa Orissa West Bengal 0 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 68. NATIONAL HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTUREVERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 7000 Uttar Pradesh 6000 Rajasthan Length of Total National Highways, In Km 5000 Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu Andhra Pradesh Karnataka Maharashtra 4000 Orissa Bihar Gujarat Assam 3000 y = 65.13x - 1354. West Bengal R² = 0.035 Chhattisgarh Uttarakhand Jharkhand 2000 Punjab Kerala Haryana Jammu and Kashmir Himachal Pradesh Manipur Mizoram Meghalaya 1000 Nagaland Arunachal Pradesh Tripura Goa Delhi Sikkim 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 69. AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 9 West Bengal 8 Gujarat 7 Numbers of Domestic Airports 6 5 Karnataka Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Andhra Pradesh 4 y = 0.116x - 4.225 R² = 0.098 Assam Kerala Himachal Pradesh Nadu Tamil Punjab 3 Uttar Pradesh Jammu and Kashmir Mizoram Rajasthan Uttarakhand 2 Meghalaya Nagaland Tripura Orissa Chhattisgarh Bihar Goa Haryana Delhi Manipur Jharkhand 1 Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim 0 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 70. TELEDENSITY VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS Delhi 200 Teledensity , Phones per 100 people in the population 150 y = 4.650x - 210.8 R² = 0.340 Himachal Pradesh 100 Punjab Haryana Gujarat Andhra Pradesh Rajasthan Maharashtra Madhya Pradesh Goa Nagaland Uttar Pradesh Bihar 50 Manipur Tripura Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Meghalaya Assam Kerala Orissa Karnataka West Bengal Sikkim Tamil Nadu Uttarakhand Jammu and Kashmir Jharkhand Chhattisgarh 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 71. LITERACY RATES VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 100 95 Kerala Mizoram 90 Tripura Goa Delhi 85 Himachal Pradesh Literacy Rates Sikkim Maharashtra Nagaland Manipur Tamil Nadu Uttarakhand y = 0.237x + 63.62 80 R² = 0.023 West Bengal Punjab Haryana Meghalaya Karnataka 75 Orissa Gujarat Assam Chhattisgarh Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh 70 Jammu and Kashmir Jharkhand Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Rajasthan 65 Bihar 60 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 72. EDUCATION VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 20 Millions Uttar Pradesh 18 16 Students enrolled in higher secondary classes 14 12 10 Andhra Pradesh 8 6 Maharashtra Madhya Pradesh Tamil Nadu 4 West Bengal y = 89218x - 3E+06 Rajasthan Karnataka Bihar R² = 0.014 Gujarat 2 Orissa Kerala Haryana Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Punjab Delhi Jammu and Kashmir Assam Uttarakhand Tripura Nagaland Manipur Himachal Pradesh Goa Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya 0 Mizoram Sikkim 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 73. RURAL TO URBANLITERACY RATIO VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 100.00 Kerala Ratio of Urban to rural literacy rates in percentage terms Delhi Goa 95.00 Tripura Himachal Pradesh Uttarakhand Manipur Sikkim 90.00 Uttar Pradesh y = 0.305x + 67.33 Haryana Punjab R² = 0.056 Mizoram Maharashtra West Bengal Tamil Nadu 85.00 Nagaland Jammu and Kashmir Gujarat Orissa Karnataka Assam 80.00 Chhattisgarh Bihar Meghalaya Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan Andhra Pradesh Jharkhand 75.00 Arunachal Pradesh 70.00 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 74. GENDER DISPARITY (LITERACY)VERSUS COMPETITIVENESS 100.00 Meghalaya Kerala Mizoram Ratio of Female Literacy Rate to male Literacy rates 95.00 Nagaland Tripura 90.00 Delhi Goa Sikkim Punjab Assam Tamil Nadu Manipur Himachal Pradesh Maharashtra 85.00 Karnataka Gujarat y = 0.007x + 81.97 Arunachal Pradesh R² = 3E-05 Uttarakhand Andhra Pradesh 80.00 Orissa Haryana West Bengal Uttar Pradesh Jammu and Kashmir Chhattisgarh Madhya Pradesh 75.00 Bihar Jharkhand 70.00 Rajasthan 65.00 60.00 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 75. DEMOGRAPHICS OF INDIA2011 Age Pyramid for India in 2011 80+ 4469 5163 75-79 6075 7017 70-74 8910 10034 65-69 11991 12406 60-64 16693 15712 55-59 22391 20447 50-54 28157 26038 45-49 33218 31993 40-44 36773 36691 Males 35-39 40596 40164 Female 30-34 46050 42855 25-29 54078 47877 20-24 62281 55757 15-19 63479 58248 10-14 61318 57259 5-9 60092 53394 0-4 60746 54133 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 Population of males / females in Thousands in 2011 Source: Census of India, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 76. DEMOGRAPHICS OF INDIA2026 Age Pyramid for India in 2026 80+ 8412 11465 75-79 9937 10644 70-74 15820 15819 65-69 22185 21982 60-64 28268 28651 55-59 32968 34124 50-54 37704 38267 45-49 43702 41361 40-44 51965 46466 Male 35-39 60313 54219 Female 30-34 61859 56739 25-29 60113 55998 20-24 59176 52410 15-19 59529 52739 10-14 59500 52734 5-9 58396 51790 0-4 55328 49256 80000 60000 40000 20000 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 Projected Population of males / females in Thousands Source: Census of India, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 77. OVERALL DEPENDENCE RATIOOF STATES Dependence Ratios 2011 Dependence ratio 2026 West Bengal 44.58 42.35 Uttarakhand 56.39 47.88 Uttar Pradesh 66.11 55.02 Tamil Nadu 43.07 43.78 Rajasthan 60.51 46.67 Punjab 46.62 41.77 Orissa 48.47 43.43 NE States Excluding Assam 44.57 42.23 Maharashtra 48.85 42.72 Madhya Pradesh 60.18 48.37 Kerala 45.23 45.96 Karnataka 45.97 43.46 Jharkhand 55.35 47.13 Jammu & Kashmir 50.27 43.11 Himachal Pradesh 46.91 42.87 Haryana 51.12 41.24 Gujarat 48.40 43.16 Delhi 39.96 34.81 Chattisgarh 57.45 48.40 Bihar 49.71 47.67 Assam 51.97 45.14 Andhra Pradesh 45.05 42.49 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 Dependence ratio 2011 Dependence ratio 2026 Source: Census of India, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 78. GOVERNMENT HOSPITALS VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 1800 Orissa Bihar 1600 1400 Number of government Hoispitals 1200 1000 Uttar Pradesh Karnataka Maharashtra 800 Uttarakhand Tamil Nadu 600 Jharkhand Rajasthan y = 11.66x - 253.3 Kerala R² = 0.016 Madhya Pradesh Gujarat Andhra Pradesh 400 West Bengal Punjab Chhattisgarh Arunachal Pradesh Haryana 200 Assam Himachal Pradesh Delhi Jammu and Kashmir Nagaland Meghalaya Manipur Tripura Sikkim Goa Mizoram 0 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 79. REGISTERED DOCTORS VERSUSCOMPETITIVENESS 10000 West Bengal 9000 Total number of registered Allopathic doctors 8000 Tamil Nadu Uttar Pradesh 7000 Rajasthan 6000 Orissa Karnataka Andhra Pradesh 5000 y = 158.8x - 5888. Maharashtra R² = 0.114 Bihar Kerala 4000 Madhya Pradesh Punjab Delhi 3000 Jammu and Kashmir Gujarat Assam Haryana 2000 Jharkhand Chhattisgarh Uttarakhand Goa 1000 Tripura Meghalaya Manipur Nagaland Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram Sikkim 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 80. PER CAPITA REVENUUEEXPENDITURE ON MEDICAL, HEALTH AND EXPENDITURE AND COMPETITIVENESS 2500.00 Goa Per capita revenue expeniture on medical, health and 2000.00 Sikkim 1500.00 Mizoram sanitation Delhi Arunachal Pradesh 1000.00 Himachal Pradesh Jammu and Kashmir Manipur y = 6.696x + 281.1 Uttarakhand R² = 0.004 Nagaland Meghalaya Tripura Assam Kerala Tamil Nadu Haryana Andhra Pradesh Punjab 500.00 Madhya Pradesh Chhattisgarh Maharashtra Gujarat Karnataka Orissa West Bengal Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh Bihar Jharkhand 0.00 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Scores Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 81. HOUSEHOLDS AND COMPETITIVENESS 35 Uttar Pradesh 30 Number of Households in Millions 25 Maharashtra Andhra Pradesh West Bengal 20 Bihar Tamil Nadu Madhya Pradesh 15 Karnataka Rajasthan Gujarat y = 37114x - 1E+07 R² = 0.045 Odisha 10 Kerala Jharkhand Assam Chhattisgarh Punjab Haryana 5 Delhi Nagaland Uttarakhand Jammu & Kashmir Tripura Himachal Pradesh Meghalaya Manipur Mizoram Goa Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim 0 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 82. AGRICULTURAL GSDP PERCAPITA AND COMPETITIVENESS 25000.00 Punjab Agricultural GSDP per capita in Rupees /Annum 20000.00 Haryana 15000.00 Nagaland Himachal Pradesh Andhra Pradesh y = 199.8x - 2794. Goa R² = 0.060 Gujarat 10000.00 Orissa West Bengal Kerala Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim Tripura Assam Rajasthan Maharashtra Jammu and Kashmir Uttarakhand Karnataka Manipur Uttar Pradesh Chhattisgarh Madhya Pradesh Meghalaya Tamil Nadu Mizoram 5000.00 Bihar Jharkhand Delhi 0.00 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 83. PER CAPITA FERTILIZERCONSUMPTION AND COMPETITIVENESS 60 Punjab Per caipita consumption of Nitrogenous fertilizers in Kg per annum 50 40 Haryana 30 Andhra Pradesh Gujarat y = 1.047x - 48.11 R² = 0.212 20 Uttar Pradesh Karnataka Maharashtra Chhattisgarh Madhya Pradesh Rajasthan Uttarakhand Tamil Nadu Bihar West Bengal 10 Orissa Jammu & Kashmir Assam Himachal Pradesh Kerala Tripura Manipur Mizoram Goa Nagaland Arunachal PradeshJharkhand Delhi Meghalaya 0 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 84. MANUFACTURING AND COMPETITIVENESS 50000 Goa 45000 40000 Manufacturing GSDP per capita in Rupees /Annum 35000 30000 25000 Gujarat 20000 y = 966.5x - 47032 R² = 0.295 Maharashtra Haryana 15000 Tamil Nadu Chhattisgarh Karnataka Delhi 10000 Jharkhand Punjab Himachal Pradesh Andhra Pradesh Orissa Uttarakhand Kerala West Bengal Rajasthan 5000 Jammu and Kashmir Assam Uttar Pradesh Meghalaya Manipur Madhya Pradesh Nagaland Tripura Sikkim Bihar Arunachal Pradesh Mizoram 0 45 50 55 60 65 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 85. SERVICES AND COMPETITIVENESS 90000 Delhi 80000 70000 Services GSDP per capita in Rupees /Annum 60000 Goa 50000 y = 2177.x - 97702 Maharashtra R² = 0.463 Haryana 40000 Kerala Punjab Tamil Nadu 30000 Karnataka Mizoram Gujarat Andhra Pradesh Sikkim West Bengal Nagaland Uttarakhand Tripura Himachal Pradesh 20000 Arunachal Pradesh Meghalaya Orissa Assam Jammu and Kashmir Chhattisgarh Rajasthan Manipur Uttar PradeshMadhya Pradesh 10000 Jharkhand Bihar 0 45 50 55 60 65 70 Microeconomic Competitiveness Score Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 86. HOUSEHOLDS IN INDIA Households in India (in Millions) 2001 and 2011 32.92 23.83 21.02 20.07 18.94 18.49 25.76 13.18 14.97 12.18 19.06 12.58 16.85 9.66 15.72 7.72 14.17 6.37 13.98 5.62 6.18 10.92 0.51 0.54 0.22 0.40 5.41 0.26 0.32 9.64 4.72 1.48 2.02 10.23 9.34 0.13 0.84 2.00 4.15 0.28 6.60 7.87 0.21 4.94 3.53 1.24 1.55 4.86 0.40 0.42 0.16 0.33 4.27 0.10 0.66 1.59 Percentage of Households in India 2001 and 2011 having electricity 96.9 96.8 96.6 90.4 90.5 85.1 90.6 94.4 83.9 92.5 93.4 92.2 84.2 81.6 67.1 87 65.7 75.3 68.4 67 93.6 94.8 60.9 91.9 68.4 80.4 82.9 80.7 78.6 77.8 78.2 54.5 67.2 45.8 70.2 70.0 77.5 69.6 63.6 43 36.8 60.3 54.7 37.1 53.1 60.0 54.7 16.4 42.7 41.8 37.5 24.9 10.3 26.9 31.9 24.3 Percentage of Households having electricity in India 2001 Percentage of Households having electricity in India 2011 Source: Census of India,2011 Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 87. ACCESS TO WATER 100 3.4 0.9 3.2 2 3.1 1.7 1.8 3.4 2.3 2 2.6 2.2 3.2 3.5 2.4 6.7 3 5.1 5.2 0.1 4.4 0.7 14.1 5.7 3.6 11.1 2.9 11.3 3.5 7.2 7.6 0.3 3.7 2 9.6 6.9 8.2 16.7 2.9 15.8 11.1 0.5 90 12.9 0 20.6 16.7 16 89.5 21.9 16.3 9.9 4.6 0.6 29.9 20 2.4 9.2 13.7 1.5 12.2 85.3 0 34.8 11.6 85.4 5.1 80 22 12 10.7 4.5 47.2 5.5 79.8 11.4 14.4 2.2 Percentage by source of households 7.1 6.4 43.8 9 70 1.1 3 5.7 18.1 2.6 6.5 0.9 2.8 47.1 69 69.9 68.8 24.7 68.2 25.3 64.9 0.8 67.9 66.1 65.5 4.7 58.4 60 63.9 25.7 62 58.7 50.1 50.2 41.5 86.6 0.4 25.4 50 0.5 6.5 51 27.4 10.8 47.2 7.5 40 40.6 39.3 38.6 20 30 33.2 36.5 4 6 11.4 29.3 27.3 19.5 25.4 20 18.9 23.4 20.7 10 12.9 13.8 4.3 10.5 0 4.4 Tap water Well Handpump Tubewell Tank, Pond, Lake, River, Spring, Canal and any other source Source: Census of India,2011 Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 88. EXPORT COMPETITIVENESS 160,000 Madhya Share of Exports from various states in 2010-11 Value of Exports from various states Pradesh 1% Goa 140,000 1% Punjab 2% Rest of the 120,000 Rajasthan states 53788 2% 11% 61694 Delhi Exports in Millions of Dollars 2% Gujarat 100,000 Kerala 25% 3% Odisha 3% 80,000 West Bengal 3% 43356 60,000 38775 Uttar Pradesh Maharashtra 3% 21% Haryana 23378 3% Tamil Nadu 40,000 44667 9% 40272 Andhra Pradesh 16085 13603 12567 5% 20,000 Karnataka 9093 8208 18540 8559 8584 7111 6990 6547 5% 5524 12296 9897 5679 4197 5843 3230 4792 7571 5583 3351 4753 0 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Source: Economic Survey of India 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 89. COUNTRY EQUIVALENTS BAHA CUBA MAS Source: EIU 2011, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 90. EXPORTS FROM THETOP 15 STATES PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL Jammu and Kashmir Himachal Pradesh Pakistan China Punjab Uttarakhand 1.6 Haryana 3.4 Delhi Arunachal Pradesh Nepal 2.4 Uttar Pradesh Sikkim Rajasthan 3.3 2.1 Assam Nagaland Bihar Meghalaya Manipur Tripura Gujarat Jharkhand Mizoram 24.6 Madhya Pradesh West Bengal 1.2 2.8 Chhattisgarh Odisha 2.8 Maharashtra 21.4 Bay of Bengal Arabian Sea Andhra Pradesh 5.0 Goa 0.7 Karnataka 5.4 Tamil Nadu Kerala 9.3 2.6 Sri Lanka Indian Ocean Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 91. NUMBER OF PPPPROJECTS IN INDIA Jammu and Kashmir 3 Himachal Pradesh Pakistan 1 China Punjab Uttarakhand 35 21 Haryana 40 15 Delhi Nepal Arunachal Pradesh Sikkim 7 Uttar Pradesh 31 Rajasthan 22 Assam Nagaland 0 67 7 Bihar Meghalaya 2 18 Manipur 0 Tripura Gujarat Jharkhand 0 Mizoram 74 Madhya Pradesh 11 West Bengal 0 88 36 Chhattisgarh 4 Odisha 33 Maharashtra 88 Bay of Bengal Arabian Sea Andhra Pradesh Goa 100 2 Karnataka 108 Tamil Nadu Kerala 52 33 Sri Lanka Indian Ocean Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 92. POPULATION PERCENTAGES INSTATES Jammu and Kashmir 1.04 Himachal Pradesh Pakistan 0.57 China Punjab Uttarakhand 2.29 0.84 Haryana 2.09 Delhi Nepal Arunachal Pradesh 1.38 Sikkim 0.11 Uttar Pradesh Rajasthan 16.49 Nagaland 5.67 Assam 0.16 2.58 Bihar Meghalaya 0.24 8.58 Manipur 0.22 Tripura Gujarat Jharkhand 0.30 Mizoram 4.99 Madhya Pradesh 2.72 West Bengal 0.09 6.00 7.55 Chhattisgarh 2.11 Odisha 3.47 Maharashtra 9.29 Bay of Bengal Arabian Sea Andhra Pradesh Goa 7.00 0.12 Karnataka 5.05 Tamil Nadu Kerala 5.96 2.76 Sri Lanka Indian Ocean Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 93. PROSPERITY IN INDIA Jammu and Kashmir 474 Himachal Pradesh Pakistan 872 China Punjab Uttarakhand 821 650 1056 Haryana 1652 Delhi Arunachal Pradesh Nepal 669 553 Uttar Pradesh Sikkim Rajasthan 320 494 Assam Nagaland 396 Bihar Meghalaya 378 571 254 Manipur 394 Gujarat Jharkhand Tripura Mizoram 941 Madhya Pradesh 404 West Bengal 544 529 377 615 Chhattisgarh 534 Odisha Maharashtra 487 945 Bay of Bengal Arabian Sea Andhra Pradesh Goa 698 1788 Karnataka 713 Tamil Nadu Kerala 801 933 Sri Lanka Indian Ocean All the figures are in dollars, The exchange rate taken for arriving at the figures was 1 US$ = 49 Rupees Source: Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 94. STATE OF INDUSTRIES 10000000 Andhra Pradesh West Bengal Uttar Pradesh Gujarat Karnataka Maharashtra Delhi Kerala Rajasthan Tamil Nadu Orissa Punjab Bihar Assam Madhya Pradesh Haryana 1000000 Jharkhand Jammu & Kashmir Chhattisgarh Tripura Uttarakhand Meghalaya Goa All India Average of India All Manipur 100000 Sikkim Himachal Pradesh All India Average 18,54,826 people Nagaland Arunachal Pradesh 23816.62 Crores employed/ state Mizoram 10000 1000 100 10 1 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 Contribution in Rs Crores Source: MSME , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 95. CONTRIBUTION PER PERSONIN INDUSTRIES 7.00 6.00 5.75 Contribution in Lakhs of Rupees 5.00 4.00 3.79 3.88 3.56 3.34 2.96 Average 3.00 Contribution of 2.76 1.57 2.27 Lakhs/Person 1.98 2.00 1.77 1.72 1.41 1.37 1.26 1.20 1.00 0.76 0.76 0.81 0.51 0.55 0.43 0.62 0.62 0.30 0.36 0.35 0.25 0.14 0.20 0.00 Source: MSME 4th round , Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 96. PER UNIT EMPLOYMENTVERSUS PER UNIT GROSS OUTPUT 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 Market value of Fixed Investments in Crores of 40.00 Rupees 30.00 Original value of Plant and Machinery/ Equipment in Crores of Rupees 20.00 10.00 0.00 Manufacturing Services Manufacturing Services Per unit employment (Person) 3.85 2.83 Per unit Gross Output (in Lakhs of Rupees) 3.56 3.54 Per unit revenues/ per unit employment 0.92 1.25 Source: MSME 4th round, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 97. MARKET VALUE VERSUSORIGINAL VALUE OF PLANT AND EQUIPMENT 80.00 60.00 Market value of Fixed Investments in Crores of 40.00 Rupees Original value of Plant and Machinery/ 20.00 Equipment in Crores of Rupees 0.00 Manufacturing Services Manufacturing Services Market value of Fixed Investments in Crores of Rupees 77.71 14.63 Original value of Plant and Machinery/ Equipment in Crores of Rupees 29.18 6.51 No of times valued by the market 2.66 2.25 Source: MSME fourth round, Institute for Competitiveness Analysis
- 98. CREATING A STATEECONOMIC STRATEGY State Value Proposition What are the main strengths, positive attributes, location advantage etc of the particular state in question. Developing Unique Strengths Achieving and Maintaining parity with peers • How can the state leverage on its • What are the key weaknesses unique capabilities and create new which need to be taken care of ones? while forming maintaining parity • Which businesses/ clusters can be with peers? made stronger? State economic strategy requires setting clear priorities and measuring against predefined criteria.
- 99. COMPETITION AMONG STATES Tactical (Zero Sum Strategic (Positive Competition) Sum Competition) • Focus on FDI investments • Focus on domestic and existing • Compete in every domain companies • Compete in specialized cluster domains • Offer tax benefits across the • Government incentives and support for spectrum training, infrastructure, and institutions • Provide subsidies to lower / offset • Improve the efficiency of doing business costs business • Economies of scale to help benefit from • Every city and sub-region for itself multiple geographies • Government is responsible for • Government and the private sector development of cluster. collaborate to build cluster strength Source: Michael E Porter
- 100. HOW SHOULD STATESCOMPETE WITH EACH OTHER Old Model New Model • Economic development is a • Government drives economic collaborative process involving development through policy government at multiple decisions and incentives levels, companies, teaching and research institutions, and private sector organizations Competitiveness is the result of both top-down and bottom-up processes in which many companies and institutions take responsibility Source: Michael E Porter
- 101. COMPETITION AMONG STATES •The purpose of a sound economic policy is to increase the overall prosperity in the state and for that the states should focus on increasing their competitiveness. • Improvements and productivity and technological advancement are the guiding principles in this regard. • Competitiveness requires a fundamental rethinking of usage of your existing resources. • For government has to fundamentally rethink its role, it should try to foster a spirit of entrepreneurship in the private sector. • The criteria for judging the merits and demerits of an economic policy should be by outcomes and not political philosophy. • The prosperity of India will depend largely on the states and not just the (Center) Delhi.
- 102. INTERPRETATION CHARTS • The snapshot chart summarizes the relative performance of a state on levels and trends in 5 key measures. The circles in the chart show the measurement of the chart legend. • Prosperity: State GDP per capita and 10 year trend. • Productivity: Average Private wage and 10 year trend. • Labour Mobilization: Total labour force as a share of civilian population and 10 year trend. • Clusters: Total number of people employed in the cluster and total number of enterprises in the cluster. • Type of Economy: Factor Driven economies, Changeover economies, Investment driven economies, Transition economies, Innovation driven economies and city state economies. Position Trend Prosperity Productivity Labour Mobilization State of Clusters Top 33.33% of the states Type of Economy Investment Driven 33.33%-66.67% of the states Construction Leading Clusters Agriculture 66.67% to 100% of Electricity and gas supply the states
- 103. COMPONENTS OF REGIONALECONOMIES • The economy has been looked at from the primary, secondary and tertiary Perspective. These sectors are then looked in detail to find the contribution of each sub sector to the three primary sectors namely Agriculture, Industry and Services. • The result is a bubble chart which shows the contribution of each sub sector to the economy. • The size of the bubble represents the size of the GSDP contribution in Rs. Crores. 0.45 0.4 Manipur/National GSDP share (Percent) ,2011 Public administration and 0.35 defence Construction 0.3 The regions share of Fishing cluster GSDP relative to its size 0.25 Electricity, gas and water Strong and 0.2 Forestry and logging supply Other services Growing Position 0.15 Agricuture 0.1 Communication Real states, ownership of Trade, hotel and dwellings and business 0.05 Manufacturing Transport by other means restaurant Banking and insurance services Storage 0 Railways Cluster is growing -5 -0.05 0 5 10 15 20 faster than Indian Average -0.1 Change in contribution of GSDP of Manipur to total Indian GSDP, CAGR (2000-2011)
- 104. A BRIEF NOTEOF THE REGIONS AND OVERALL ECONOMY OF MANIPUR • The political boundaries of a state often encompass many distinct regional economies or portions of large regional economies. A comprehensive approach to economic development should reflect both the distinct economies within the state as well as strong linkages to the economies in the neighboring states. In addition to this clusters should be mapped on areas of high economic growth. This will lead to spillover effects in the long run. 3000000 2549085 • A state's or region’s economy can be divided 2500000 into 3 components namely 2000000 GSDP in Rs. Crore 1492375 1500000 1. Primary/Agriculture sector 2. Secondary/Industry sector 1000000 924340 3. Tertiary/Service sector 500000 1699 2451 2752 0 Agriculture, forestry Industry Services and fishing In this report we focus more on Industrial sector to bring out its components in detail.
- 105. CLUSTERS AND SUBCLUSTERS IN THE INDIAN ECONOMY Agricultural products Leather industries Other transportation • Grain mill products, starches & starch products • Tanning & dressing of leather; luggage, handbags • Other transport equipment and prepared animal foods • Railway and tramway locomotives and rolling stock • Other food products Lighting electric equipment • Transport equipment • Beverages • Insulated wire and cable Processed food Apparels and related industries • Accumulators, primary cells and primary batteries • Manufacture of food products and beverages • Knitted and crocheted fabrics and articles • Electric lamps and lighting equipment • Meat, fish, fruit vegetables, oils and fats • Wearing apparel; dressing and dyeing of fur • Other electrical equipment • Dairy product • Wearing apparel, except fur apparel Machinery and equipment Production • Structural metal products, tanks, reservoirs • Agricultural services • Other fabricated metal products Manufacturing • Agriculture, hunting, and related services activities • Machinery and equipment • General purpose machinery Publishing and printing Automotive • Special purpose machinery • Publishing • Bodies (coach work) for motor • Printing and service activities related to printing vehicles Medical equipment • Parts and accessories for • Medical, precision and optical Rubber and plastic industries motor vehicles & their engines instruments, watches & clocks • Rubber products • Plastic products Chemicals Metals • Basic chemicals • Basic Iron & Steel • Basic precious and non-ferrous metals Television and allied electronic industries • Casting of metals • Electronic valves and tubes Domestic and electric Industries and other electronic components • Domestic appliances • Office, accounting and computing machinery Minerals • Television and radio transmitters • Minerals and apparatus • Electrical machinery and apparatus • Television and radio receivers • Electric motors, generators and transformers • Mining Electricity distribution and control apparatus • Mining and quarrying Textiles • Spinning, weaving and finishing of textiles Footwear Pulp and Paper • Other textiles • Footwear • Pulp and Paper Industries Tobacco • Tobacco products Furniture Other service industries • Furniture • Other Service Industries Wood and forest products Oil and gas • Wood and of products Glass and related industries • Coke oven products • Saw milling and planning of wood • Glass and glass products • Refined petroleum products • Products of wood, cork, straw and plaiting materials