FDI in India’s Retail Sector
More Bad than Good?

By Mohan Guruswamy Kamal Sharma Jeevan Prakash Mohanty Thomas J. Korah

CPAS Centre for Policy Alternatives 94 Uday Park New Delhi 110049 Website: www.cpasind.com Email: cpasind@yahoo.co.in Telephone: 51650995/7 Facsimile: 51650996


Retailing is the interface between the producer and the individual consumer buying for personal consumption. This excludes direct interface between the manufacturer and institutional buyers such as the government and other bulk customers. A retailer is one who stocks the producer’s goods and is involved in the act of selling it to the individual consumer, at a margin of profit. As such, retailing is the last link that connects the individual consumer with the manufacturing and distribution chain. The retail industry in India is of late often being hailed as one of the sunrise sectors in the economy. AT Kearney, the well-known international management consultancy, recently identified India as the ‘second most attractive retail destination’ globally from among thirty emergent markets. It has made India the cause of a good deal of excitement and the cynosure of many foreign eyes. With a contribution of 14% to the national GDP and employing 7% of the total workforce (only agriculture employs more) in the country, the retail industry is definitely one of the pillars of the Indian economy1. (see Table 1) The Indian Scenario: Trade or retailing is the single largest component of the services sector in terms of contribution to GDP. Its massive share of 14% is double the figure of the next largest broad economic activity in the sector. (see Table 1)


Singhal, Arvind, Indian Retail: The road ahead, Retail biz, www.etretailbiz.com

5 22. 15. hand cart and pavement vendors.M. on the other hand.Ravi. that is.1 7.2 6666. paan/beedi shops.0 2943. refers to the traditional formats of low-cost retailing. Organised retailing refers to trading activities undertaken by licensed retailers. the local kirana shops.8 6.G.6 8983.5 10534.0 Communications 6.6 Retailers 8542.com .3 7055. Evolution of Food Retail Chains: The Indian Context. www. These include the corporate-backed hypermarkets and retail chains. Lalith Achoth. 2003.4 11165.0 Hotels & Restaurants 1.5 7482.3 Table 1: Components of Service Sector in India Components Share % in Growth during GDP (2002-03) 2002-03 5. convenience stores.1 5.9 5. (see Table 2) Table 2: Growth of Retail Outlets in India (‘000) Outlets 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2769.1 5. owner manned general stores.0 4. etc. Business/Legal Services 5.1 Non-Food 5773.3 Construction 14. 2004) The retail industry is divided into organised and unorganised sectors.C.1 -7.3 Defence 7. those who are registered for sales tax.9 3123.1 4.8 Storage 3.0 Total Retailers Source: P.6 9966.0 6332. etc.3 6.6 9455.6 Banking & Insurance 6. Unorganised retailing.9 Real Estate.Chengappa. for example. income tax.9 11.5 Trade 1. B.0 3682.4 3300.2 Source: Presentation to FICCI by MBN Rao (Chairman. Arpita Mukherjee. Indian Bank): “Strategy for Financing Service Sector” (Sept.7 Railways 4. and also the privately owned large retail businesses. 5-6th Nov.Ramachandra Reddy and P.ficci.2 3480.9 Food Retailers 6040.3 7.2 Other Community & Social Services Total 56.0 Other Transport 0.

Achoth. P.com Singhal. www.000 crores.indiaonestop.000 crores and poised to double in 2005.com . According to this report dated Nov.M. Thus even without FDI driving it. 2003. FICCI has estimated the total retail business to be Rs. Ramachandra Reddy B. the corporate owned sector is expanding at a furious rate. Arvind.ficci. 38. 2003.100 billion from just Rs.ksa-technopak.3 In a recent presentation. AT Kearney estimated it to be Rs. Estimates vary widely about the true size of the retail business in India. www. increasing to Rs. what is the need for FDI? It is not that retailing in India is in the need of any technology special to foreign chains. 2 3 Ganguly. Changing Retail Landscape. 4 Chengappa. Mukherjee. www. 4.G. 15.82.2 On the other hand. while organised trade accounts only for the remaining 2%.000 crores or 44% of GDP4.000 crores in 1999 and poised to grow to Rs.35. One thing all consultants are agreed upon is that the total size of the corporate owned retail business was Rs.00. Food retail trade is a very large segment of the total economic activity of our country and due to its vast employment potential. Arpita. Retailing Industry in India. Efficiency enhancements and increase in the food retail sales activity would have a cascading effect on employment and economic activity in the rural areas for the marginalized workers. 1999. Evolution of Food Retail Chains: The Indian Context. Lalith. Technopak Projections. if one used the Government’s figures the retail trade in 2002-03 amounted to Rs.00.com. The question then that arises is that since there is obviously no dearth of indigenous capital.1 billion in 1996. & Ravi. it deserves very special focused attention. 11. Saby.4 Unorganized retailing is by far the prevalent form of trade in India – constituting 98% of total trade. 5-6th Nov. sales now account for 44% of the total GDP and food sales account for 63% of the total retail sales. 3. P.000 crores by 2005 and keep growing at a rate of 40% per annum.C.

Given the recent numbers indicated by other studies. both due to economic expansion as well as the ‘jobless growth’ that we have seen in the past decade. Though these numbers translate to approximately 8% of the workforce in the country (half the normal share in developed countries) there are far more retailers in India than other countries in absolute numbers. 31.” 5 Iyengar. the number of individually-owned retail outlets far outnumber the corporatebacked institutions. India’s workforce is proportionately much larger.atimes. this is only indicative of the magnitude of expansion the retail trade is experiencing. That about 4% of India’s population is in the retail trade says a lot about how vital this business is to the socio-economic equilibrium in India. Table 3: Share of retailing in employment across different countries Country Employment (%) 8 India USA 16 Poland 12 Brazil 15 7 China Source: Presentation to FICCI by Alan Rosling (Chairman. Jayanthi. January. .com. because of the demographic profile and the preponderance of youth. www. Online Asia Times.2004.5 Employment in Retailing: A simple glance at the employment numbers is enough to paint a good picture of the relative sizes of these two forms of trade in India – organised trade employs roughly 5 lakh people (see Tables 8 & 9). India Confront the Wal-Marts. It must be noted that even within the organised sector. China. whereas the unorganized retail trade employs nearly 3. Jardine Matheson Group): “International Experience on Policy Issues.95 crores5! According to a GoI study the number of workers in retail trade in 1998 was almost 175 lakhs.

which together form the bulk. India’s figure is low even in comparison with other Asian developing economies like China. (Here development is used in the narrowest sense of the term.6 Organised retail is still in the stages of finding its feet in India even now. and bazaars. These figures quite accurately reveal the relative underdevelopment of the retail industry in India. Thailand. Most importantly. 18. that is. paan/beedi shop. 6 .9 million in the US. Figures quoted from Anil Sasi’s article “Indian Retail Most Fragmented”(Aug. Compare this with the figure of just 0. South Korea and Philippines. yet catering to more than 13 times of the Indian retail market size. all of whom have figures hovering around the 20-25% mark. the local kirana shop. with about 11 million outlets operating in the country and only 4% of them being larger than 500 square feet in size. hardware stores. 2004) The Hindu Business Line. and what role it plays in the lives of its citizens. from a social as well as an economic perspective. convenience stores. weekly haats. Indian retail is highly fragmented. India still predominantly houses the traditional formats of retailing. Though organised trade makes up over 70-80% of total trade in developed economies. implying lean employment and high automation) Table 4: Retail Trade in India & South East Asia Countries Organised Unorganised 2 98 India 20 80 China 15 85 South Korea 25 75 Indonesia 35 65 Philippines 40 60 Thailand 50 50 Malaysia Source: CRISIL 6 Retail as a ‘Forced Employment’ Sector: It is important to understand how retailing works in our economy.

com 8 Iyengar. given the lack of opportunities. Carrefour and Ahold were waiting in the wings to enter the retail arena. 7 Singhal. many million Indians are virtually forced into the services sector. Online Asia Times. Arvind. highly fragmented. depending on his or her means and capital. This phenomenon quite aptly explains the millions of kirana shops and small stores. a retailer is born. In 2001 they estimated there were 11 outlets for every 1. . One of the principal reasons behind the explosion of retail and its fragmented nature in the country is the fact that retailing is probably the primary form of disguised unemployment/underemployment in the country. 31.ksa-technopak. “ A Strong Pillar of Indian Economy.com. seemingly out of circumstance rather than choice. Here. India has the highest shop density in the world. India Confront the Wal-Marts. Given the already over-crowded agriculture sector. which should be the prime concern of the policy maker.7 Further. And thus. and the hard nature and relatively low wages of jobs in both.8 It does not talk about creating additional jobs however. www. provided the sector is opened up significantly.000 people. According to the global consultancy firms AC Neilsen and KSA Technopak. a report prepared by McKinsey & Company and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) predicted that global retail giants such as Tesco. and the stagnating manufacturing sector. Jayanthi China.7 The Indian retail industry was. it is almost a natural decision for an individual to set up a small shop or store. This report also states that the Indian retail market holds the potential of becoming a $300 billion per year market by 2010.” www. The explosion of retail outlets in the more busy streets of Indian villages and towns is a visible testimony of this.atimes. Kingfisher. and continues to be.2004. January.

with low capital and infrastructure needs. as opposed to an economy like China. GOI . being a free and democratic country. Yet. pension. As on January 1st of this year. there were 413. Because of this fragmentation. Volume 57.gov. even this does not annul the fact that a multitude of these so-called ‘self-employed’ retailers are simply trying to scrape together a living. even though much of it is marginal. to enjoy the benefits and security that a job in the organised sector provides – lifetime employment. But over the period 199293 to 2001-02. labour and real estate options.in Monthly abstract of Statistics. Central Statistical Organisation. and as such. where employment is regulated. July 2004. in the face of limited opportunities for employment. India. No.7. one could brand this sector as one of “forced 9 10 As per figures given in www. They register at the exchange.88 lakhs job seekers registered at the Employment Exchange9. In this light. only a total of 30. Therefore. mostly in retail. functioning at a small-scale level. Retailing is by far the easiest business to enter. performs a vital function in the economy as a social security net for the unemployed. and union membership etc.000 jobs have been added in the organised sector in the whole country10 A vast majority is aware of what these figures signify – that they are most unlikely to get such jobs.tn. rarely eligible for tax and following a cheap model of operations. The typical traditional retailer follows the low-cost-and-size format.8 The presence of more than one retailer for every hundred persons is indicative of the lack of economic opportunities that is forcing people into this form of self-employment. provides its people with this cushion of being able to make a living for oneself through self-employment. the Indian retail sector typically suffers from limited access to capital. they find jobs in the informal sector.

walmart. and is growing annually at an average of 12-13%. Only 4% of the 12 million retail outlets were larger than 500 sq. This entails job losses by the millions. The average size of a Wal-mart is 85. Let alone the average Indian retailer in the unorganized sector. It had 4806 stores employing 1.075. 2004.4 mn persons.com . no Indian retailer in the organised sector will be able to meet the onslaught from a firm such as Wal-Mart – when it comes. In 2004 Wal-Mart had a 9% return on assets and 21% return on equity.5 mn persons. Of these 1355 were outside the USA. The Waiting Foreign Juggernaut: The largest retailer in the world ‘Wal-Mart’ has a turnover of $ 256 bn.000 sq. purely because of the paucity of opportunities in other sectors. In 2004 its net profit was $ 9. 186. The turnover per employee averaged $ 175. 735.000 crores employing 39.000.11 By contrast the average Indian retailer had a turnover of Rs. The total turnover of the unorganized retail sector was Rs. With its incredibly deep pockets WalMart will be able to sustain losses for many years till its immediate competition is wiped out..ft and the average turnover of a store was about $ 51 mn. 11 Annual Report.000 mn. Wal-Mart Corp.ft in size. www. where the retailer is pushed into it.9 employment”. This is a normal predatory strategy used by large players to drive out small and dispersed competition.

the review notes that creating an effective supply chain from the producer to the consumer is critical for development of many sectors.540 persons displacing nearly eight million persons employed in the unorganized retail sector. made while making the mid year review for 2004-05. Times of India. with arguments to support both sides of the debate. “On retail. This would mean an employment of just 43. a great deal of prudence should go into policymaking. We need to take a deep hard look at FDI in the retail sector. If Wal-Mart were to open an average Wal-Mart store in each of these cities and they reached the average Wal-Mart performance per store – we are looking at a turnover of over Rs. including international ones merits careful attention. With possible implications of this magnitude. Mr.2004 . Chidambaram.”12 The Question of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Retail: Given this backdrop.800 billion on today’s basis.32.330 mn with only 10195 employees. this would mean a turnover of Rs.10 India has 35 towns each with a population over 1 million. particularly processed and semi-processed agro-products. Rather we seem to moving towards a policy steamrolled obviously by vested interests acting in concert with the CII & FICCI. It is widely acknowledged 12 Review hints at FDI in retail. pp 1-15. 14 Dec. 80. P.000 persons. it would mean displacing about 4. the role that could be played by organised retail chains. In this context. In this context we must be concerned about the statement the Finance Minister. as the now somewhat hard-pressed Hindustan Lever Limited anxiously anticipates. If large FDI driven retailers were to take 20% of the retail trade. Extrapolating this with the average trend in India. the recent clamour about opening up the retail sector to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) becomes a very sensitive issue. it says.

11 that FDI can have some positive results on the economy. it would make eminent sense that any policy that results in the elimination of jobs in the unorganised retail sector should be kept on hold. This in turn can lead to greater output and domestic consumption. or at least. As per present regulations. But the most important factor against FDI driven “modern retailing” is that it is labour displacing to the extent that it can only expand by destroying the traditional retail sector. the world’s biggest retailer sets up operations in India at prime locations in the 35 large cities and towns that house more than 1 . triggering a series of reactions that in the long run can lead to greater efficiency and improvement of living standards. will render millions of small retailers jobless by closing the small slit of opportunity available to them. brought about by the technology and know-how of foreign players in the market. This is because the primary task of government in India is still to provide livelihoods and not create so called efficiencies of scale by creating redundancies. Allowing 49% or 26% FDI (which have been the proposed figures till date) will have immediate and dire consequences. Till such time we are in a position to create jobs on a large scale in manufacturing. Entry of foreign players now will most definitely disrupt the current balance of the economy. apart from greater integration into the global economy. Though most of the high decibel arguments in favour of FDI in the retail sector are not without some merit. not yet. Imagine if Wal-Mart. it is not fully applicable to the retailing sector in India. Supporters of FDI in retail trade talk of how ultimately the consumer is benefited by both price reductions and improved selection. no FDI is permitted in retail trade in India.

Registrar of Census. This means a foreign company will buy big from India and abroad and be able to sell low – severely undercutting the small retailers. which would now have demand mostly only for fluent English-speaking helpers. the company could buy cheap and sell dear”14. how the entry of just one big retailer is capable of destroying a whole local economy and send it hurtling down a spiral. Having been uprooted from their traditional form of business. Nick. the neighbouring traditional outlets are also likely to fold and perish. It is easy to visualise from the discussion above. at extremely low prices that will most likely undercut those in nearby local stores selling similar goods. Malaysia and Thailand. Such re-orientation of sourcing of materials will completely disintegrate the already established supply chain. and procure goods like vegetables and fruits directly from farmers at preordained quantities and specifications. The producers and traders at the lowest level of operations will never find place in this sector. As Nick Robbins wrote in the context of the East India Company. In time. One must also not forget how countries like China. 13. WalMart would be more likely to source its raw materials from abroad. from vegetables to the latest electronic gadgets. Once a monopoly situation is created this will then turn into buying low and selling high.” The New Statesman. these persons are unlikely to be suitable for other areas of work either. 2004) .12 million people13. GOI Robbins. given the ‘predatory’ pricing power that a foreign player is able to exert. “By controlling both ends of the chain. “The World’s First Multinational. who opened their retail sector to FDI in the recent 13 14 Census 2001. The supermarket will typically sell everything. (Dec.

13 past. in any circumstance. “Debate: Should FDI Be Allowed In Retail Branding?”. whereas the State does have the prerogative in whether foreign entry in the retail sector should be stalled or not. 6. Disturbing the Hornet’s Nest: If you assume 40 mn adults in the retail sector. But stopping an Indian retailer from growing bigger is something current public policy cannot do. override the responsibility of any society to provide economic security for its population. Plus. 15 Vijay. It is true that it is in the consumer’s best interest to obtain his goods and services at the lowest possible price. Given their economies of scale and huge resources. But this is a privilege for the individual consumer and it cannot. where tens of millions are still seeking gainful employment. Opening the retailing sector to FDI means dislocating millions from their occupation. (Dec. have been forced to enact new laws to check the prolific expansion of the new foreign malls and hypermarkets15. and pushing a lot of families under the poverty line. one must not forget that the western concept of efficiency is maximizing output while minimizing the number of workers involved – which will only increase social tensions in a poor and yet developing country like India. The Financial Express. it would translate into around 160 million dependents using a 1:4 dependency ratio. a big domestic retailer or any new foreign player will be able to provide their merchandise at cheaper rates than a smaller retailer. Tarun. 2004) . Clearly collective well-being must take precedence over individual benefits.

whereas in India. That leaves us with manufacturing as the only other alternative. (see Tables 5. you wonder where this new accommodation can be found? Agriculture already employs nearly 60% of our total workforce. But if you look at the growth rates of labour in manufacturing and industry. manufacturing accounts for a significant share of GDP.14 This dislocated and unemployed horde has to be accommodated somewhere else.7 2.5 16. 6 and 7) . Employment & Growth Rates (%) Sectors Agriculture Share % in GDP (2004) Employment Cumulative average Growth Rate during 1994-2004 Industry Service Source: FICCI (2004) & NSS 55th Round Employment Survey (1999-2000) 22.8 22. manufacturing contributes a mere 23. What is anomalous in the Indian case is the fact that in other fast developing economies. say China.1 21.2 60. and is in dire need of shedding excess baggage. Having a high contribution from services is an attribute that is characteristic of developed economies. With only 17% of our total workforce already employed in industry.7% of our GDP. The service sector’s contribution to the increase in GDP over the last 5 years has been 63. which contributes altogether only 21.9%.7 56. this sector can hardly absorb more without a major expansion.70 6. (See Table 5) Table 5: Sectoral GDP.90 So far Indian economy has been heavily geared towards the service sector that contributes 56% of our GDP.53 7.1% of the GDP.

2 58. It is only an intermediate value-adding process. Ironically it would seem that the Indian economy is getting a post-industrial profile without having been industrialised! Retailing is not an activity that can boost GDP by itself. Ugly Duckling”.9 23. the credit for its 5.9 Services Source: Bhanoji Rao – “Industry.1 Manufacturing.3 6.15 Table 6: Indian Economy: Sectoral Sources of Growth (Percentage Contributions to Increase in GDP) 1992-93 1997-98 to to 1996-97 2003-04 20. If there aren’t any goods being manufactured.4 Agriculture 62. which has been growing at 10. One could argue that the alarmingly low contribution of industry is attributable to the structural adjustments going on the sector. construction & quarrying 48. but that still cannot undermine the seriousness of 16 Calculated from World Development Indicators 2003. then there will not be many goods to be retailed! This underlines the importance of manufacturing in a developing economy. (Dec.5 Industry 28. 2004) The Economic Times It is evident that the manufacturing sector has been the engine for economic growth in China. getting rid of the flab and getting ready to compete. (Dec. 1.3 13 Agriculture & allied sectors 30.1 Services Source: Bhanoji Rao – “Industry. 2004) The Economic Times Table 7: China: Sectoral Sources of Growth (Percentage Contributions to Increase in GDP) 1990-96 1997-2002 9.8 63.9% growth over the corresponding period goes mostly to the service sector.1. Ugly Duckling”. In India.5 35. .1% since 199116.

215 million out of productive cohort of 600 million is employed in organised manufacturing. construction and storage standards. Recommendations: 1. Until that day. 3. size and specify details like. Giant shopping centres must not add to our existing urban snarl. state the minimum space. disturbing the hornet’s nest would be one very painful experience for the economy. . The Government and RBI need to evolve suitable lending policies that will enable retailers in the organised and unorganised sectors to expand and improve efficiencies. Policies that encourage unorganised sector retailers to migrate to the organised sector by investing in space and equipment should be encouraged.16 the issue at hand. could one begin thinking of dislocating some of the retailing workforce into this space. These conditionalities must be aimed at encouraging the purchase of goods in the domestic market. The retail sector in India is severely constrained by limited availability of bank finance. Only until the tardy growth of the manufacturing sector is addressed properly and its productivity chart starts to look prettier. The proposed National Commission should evolve a clear set of conditionalities on giant foreign retailers on the procurement of farm produce. A National Commission must be established to study the problems of the retail sector and to evolve policies that will enable it to cope with FDI – as and when it comes. domestically manufactured merchandise and imported goods. in that only 6. 2. the ratio of floor space to parking space etc.

branded textiles) and therefore. as well as market penetration for the retailer. returns are likely to be much higher for any retailer. Initially allow them to set up supermarkets only in metros. then it could be a source of great compensation to the displaced workforce from the retail industry. Make the costs of entry high and according to specific norms and regulations so that the retailer cannot immediately indulge in ‘predatory’ pricing. The government can also facilitate the setting up of warehousing units and cold chains. etc. According to IndiaInfoline. are not fixed (as opposed to. If this sector is given due attention. 6. to the extent of 4. agro products and food processing sector in India is responsible for $69. This is more than just a sizeable portion of the pie and what makes it even more significant is the fact that in this segment. fruits. Entry of foreign players must be gradual and with social safeguards so that the effects of the labour dislocation can be analysed & policy finetuned. In order to address the dislocation issue. GDP figures from India Observer Statistical Handbook (2004). This will address the dual problem of limited promotion and marketing ability. it becomes imperative to develop and improve the manufacturing sector in India. while its contribution to the GDP has grown at an average rate of only 3. Volume 57. The government must actively encourage setting up of co-operative stores to procure and stock their consumer goods and commodities from small producers. There has been a substantial fall in employment by the manufacturing sector. GOI.17 4. .7%17. Prices for perishable goods like vegetables. 5. and allowed to take wings. this is where economies of scale are likely to kick in and benefit the consumer in the 17 Calculated from Monthly abstract of Statistics. July 2004. Central Statistical Organisation. 7.7. No. thereby lowering the capital costs for the small retailers.06 lakhs over the period 1998 to 2001.com.4 billion out of the total $180 billion retail sector (these are 2001 figures). say.

. when the goods are procured at Rs. 2003) . etc. sorting.2 and ultimately sold to the consumer at about Rs. – “Evolution of Food Retail Chains: The Indian Context” (Nov. Often the producer loses out. community welfare centers.6 million shops retailing food and employing 4% of total workforce and contributing 10. But due attention must be given to the producer too. Ramachandra. maintaining hygiene standards.G. Mukherjee. P. upkeep of refrigeration equipment. Arpita. The Government themselves can tap into the opportunities of this segment.M. and faster turnaround of transport and higher rollover of produce. Creation of infrastructure for retailing at mandis. Set up an Agricultural Perishable Produce Commission (APPC).18 form of lower prices. Provision of training in handling. transporting. 8. packing. Recommendations for the Food Retail Sector: With 3. government and private colonies with a thrust on easier logistics and hygiene will enable greater employment and higher hygiene consciousness. Reddy.C. rather than letting it be lost to foreign players. they can more directly ensure the welfare of producers and the interest of the consumers. B. 18 Chengappa. P. Lalith.15 as in the case of tomatoes now. the food-retailing segment presents a focused opportunity to the Government to catalyze growth & employment. for example. 1. Achoth. grading. is an area where ITI’s and SISI’s can play a proactive role.9% to GDP18. 2. to ensure that procurement prices for perishable commodities are fair to farmers and that they are not distorted with relation to market prices. storing. Ravi. And by doing so.

vacuuming. 4. certification & price administration bodies can be created at district and lower levels for upgrading the technical and human interface in the rural to urban supply chain. vegetable. Cross integrations of these unique food supply chains will provide new products in new markets increasing consumer choice. e) Provide scope and opportunity for productive self-employment (since Govt. freeze frying. dehydrating. Several successful models of integrating very long food supply chains in dairy. can’t provide employment). creating . Quality regulation. d) Seek markets in India and abroad (provide charter aircrafts. Government intervention in food retail segment is necessitated by: a) The lack of any other body at remote/grassroots level. c) Maintain regulatory standards in hygiene. These one off interventions can be replicated in all states. enhance nutritional status of producers and increase caloric availability. 5. these interventions can be integrated into the supply chains of the foreign retailers in India and abroad. packing facilities for small producers at nodal points). At a subsequent stage. 6. fish and fruit have been evolved in India. Credit availability for retail traders must be encouraged with a view to enhancing employment and higher utilization of fixed assets. economic activity and employment. b) Need to provide market for casual and distant self-employed growers and gatherers. segments and areas.19 3. This would lead to less wastage (India has currently the highest wastage in the world) of perishables.

In this fashion. . market realities. and private-public cooperation. globalization.20 synergy between national priorities. the Government can try to ensure that the domestic and foreign players are approximately on an equal footing and that the domestic traders are not at an especial disadvantage. The small retailers must be given ample opportunity to be able to provide more personalized service. so that their higher costs are not duly nullified by the presence of big supermarkets and hypermarkets.

82 15.46 9.25 279. Insurance.58 35.17 0.5 9.55 12.5 69.93 16.94 97.(5) Mining & quarrying Manufacturing Electricity. July 2004.83 1.98 9. etc.92 73. Community.6 3.61 9.66 29.92 52.06 16.01 46. Real Estate.85 Total Employment 271.32 8.54 1.39 10.78 16.04 1995-96 1996-97 33.64 1.34 1.03 85. 1992-1997 (Nos.42 0.76 194. Quasi Govt.46 77.48 22.73 3 0.38 0.26 33.37 65.9 35.64 30.3 69.96 45.95 73. Social & Personal Service 78.07 50.75 275.61 9.2 75.11 86. Volume 57.3 0.55 2.02 5.58 32.(5) Mining & Quarrying Manufacturing Electricity.45 Source: Monthly Abstract Statistics.62 30.2 21.21 Table 8: Employment in Organised Sector.94 1.85 65.06 0. etc.74 29.85 80.97 5.14 64.51 9.08 0.6 Private Sector Large (3) Small (4) Agriculture.5 22. Hunting.98 21.37 9.62 31.93 17.46 21.49 0. Storage & Communications (7) Financing. Storage & Communications (7) Financing.45 33.39 0.84 12.57 11.03 47.16 17.23 16.6 5.12 0.38 29.44 5.38 11.17 0.36 35. Social & Personal Service 193.2 35.35 11.97 18. etc.53 3.14 35. Central State Local Bodies Agriculture.58 71.84 9. Real Estate.66 74.76 273.5 3.93 64.92 5.5 79. Gas & Water Construction Wholesale & Retail Trade (6) Transport.4 0.53 3.61 30. No.41 282.56 2.62 9.79 9.4 0.48 30. Central Statistical Organisation * This is the figure only for Organised Retail Sector .83 95.18 9.4 8.92 12.3 195.67 194.56 9.31 11.52 93.58 2. etc.67 1. Community.01 0.95 74.83 72.33 9.06 12.77 15.14 17. in Lakhs) Public/Private Sector 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 33. Gas & Water Construction Wholesale & Retail Trade* (6) Transport.41 0.73 94.86 29.46 11. Hunting.4 9.45 10.45 0.92 28. Insurance.04 9.16 0.06 9.55 3.19 1.63 3.(2) State Govt.78 194.59 1.55 65.8 95.92 12.44 Public Sector Central Govt. 7.

68 48.6 63.66 281.91 29.69 9.19 31.58 17.26 34.88 97. Insurance.77 86. 1997-2002 (Nos.38 187.04 0.95 73.35 10.42 0.03 97. etc.71 0.52 84.81 1.95 28.27 9.24 15.14 191.14 9.65 3.85 34. 7.67 0.76 3.81 50. Community.77 12.41 0. Volume 57.58 17 32.84 12. Central Statistical Organisation *This is the figure only for Organised Retail Sector .98 86.02 8.04 0.13 29.61 35.63 30.52 0.24 8.91 52.42 0.62 11.71 77. Storage & Communications (7) Financing.23 32.55 0.72 29.92 1.42 12. etc.01 22.35 0.69 3.83 8.14 22.09 12. Social & Personal Service 194.36 29.27 9.92 32.64 30.7 17.18 194.06 Source: Monthly Abstract Statistics.75 14.13 74.26 15.23 0.7 3.41 0.28 8.76 3. etc.59 5. July 2004.37 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 33.48 78.78 0. Insurance.61 5.3 9.94 97.61 74.33 0. Storage & Communications (7) Financing.16 9.91 17.55 5.79 50. Real Estate. Community.73 Private Sector Large (3) Small (4) Agriculture.85 0. Central State Local Bodies Agriculture.37 16.56 30.3 77.21 9.24 21.57 3.21 0.26 1.08 9. etc.3 9.57 3.96 97.22 Table 9: Employment in Organised Sector. Real Estate. Gas & Water Construction Wholesale & Retail Trade (6) Transport.58 64.53 74.25 22.43 9.81 98.46 86.(2) State Govt.84 60.23 10. in Lakhs) Public/Private Sector 1997-98 32.39 0.56 3.7 9. Hunting. Social & Personal Service 87.75 4.63 30.46 10. Quasi Govt.07 1.87 51.09 9.94 77.63 30.32 75.13 22.5 9.3 0.15 193. (5) Mining & quarrying Manufacturing Electricity.54 11.41 16.71 3.35 Public Sector Central Govt.42 Total Employment 281. No.(5) Mining & Quarrying Manufacturing Electricity.73 74.46 5.74 3.15 9.84 12.33 0.6 277.58 63.13 279.19 9.09 1. Hunting.25 61.61 13.31 9.13 0. Gas & Water Construction Wholesale & Retail Trade* (6) Transport.89 272.34 31.

MOSPI. State-wise Number of Workers Engaged in Retail Trade by Type of Enterprises in India (1998) Rural NDE DE 47320 473 20583 19512 2111 17573 2951 2275 2414 36915 35376 26141 30361 61 834 151 382 15367 7207 16027 399 83460 653 29957 29541 296 142 127 289 3872 43 994 433507 94699 3518 57992 91591 3158 46004 12441 10163 6945 83415 165253 58572 109955 1098 8204 743 1999 59629 24517 39612 1434 218380 6963 81505 213391 1186 525 410 375 8693 53 2056 1414479 Urban ALL 780377 9650 297242 565806 16988 285785 106465 63942 54824 450205 503073 503710 633612 17028 18828 3771 7909 495731 150943 279851 5731 690699 36644 817390 1046350 4593 1533 1402 1394 25068 353 6555 7883452 States/UT’s Andhra Pradesh Arunachal Pradesh Assam Bihar Goa Gujarat Haryana Himachal Pradesh Jammu & Kashmir Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Manipur Meghalaya Mizoram Nagaland Orissa Punjab Rajasthan Sikkim Tamil Nadu Tripura Uttar Pradesh West Bengal A&N Islands Chandigarh D&N Haveli Daman & Diu Delhi Lakshadwep Pondicherry India OAE 638358 5659 218667 454703 11719 222208 91073 51504 45465 329875 302444 418997 493296 15869 9790 2877 5528 420735 119219 224212 3898 388859 29028 705928 803718 3111 866 865 730 12503 257 3505 6035466 OAE 446500 2933 82218 306323 13117 365753 124590 17730 56870 276345 71970 437151 635164 19372 7333 7154 9730 136117 185621 256356 2142 297470 14422 753617 416387 1800 11226 260 1518 174315 273 9136 5140913 NDE 217763 706 16768 61316 5390 73445 14999 3706 12082 130703 44521 55169 210386 1046 1840 898 2547 24826 33274 33960 583 248451 1106 86449 171080 794 7532 97 181 109134 63 7249 1578064 DE 267496 3174 68448 171381 10167 196940 67512 10547 21327 243345 125383 166730 519775 5604 9156 1900 9647 70856 101943 113651 2034 531755 8166 401999 556196 1902 8404 545 762 227370 138 10672 3934925 ALL 931759 6813 167434 539020 28674 636138 207101 31983 90279 650393 241874 659050 1365325 26022 18329 9952 21924 231799 320838 403967 4759 1077676 23694 1242065 1143663 4496 27162 902 2461 510819 474 27057 10653902 Source: Economic Census 1998. NDE: Non-Directory Establishments. . GOI OAE: Own Account Enterprises.23 Table: 10. DE: Directory Establishments.

New Delhi . Ahemadabad. New Delhi and the Indian Institute of Management.24 About the Authors Mohan Guruswamy. Stephen’s College. Stephen’s College. Thomas J. Centre for Policy Alternatives. He was educated at St. New Delhi. Korah is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Policy Alternatives. and is a graduate of the John F. He also has many years of experience in academia and the private sector. He is currently pursuing an Economics Degree at St. Harvard University. New Delhi was formerly Advisor to the Finance Minister. Kamal Sharma is a Fellow at Centre for Policy Alternatives and an independent management consultant. Kennedy School of Government. Chairman. Jeevan Prakash Mohanty is a Research Associate at the Centre for Policy Alternatives and is a doctoral candidate at the Jawaharlal Nehru University.

please visit our website: www. Projects Currently Underway • • • • Redefining the Poverty Line of India The Tibet Conundrum Review of the Indian Education Sector Review of the Indian Transport Sector Centre for Policy Alternatives Society is a privately funded think tank focused on the study and review of public policy in India. or email us at cpasind@yahoo.com. CPAS is registered under the “Society Registration Act (XXI) of 1860”.in. . Perception FDI in Retail: More Bad than Good? Jammu & Kashmir: is there Really a Fresh Vision and Blueprint? A Socioeconomic Comparison of India’s Three Top States Centrally Planned Inequality: the Tale of Two States – Punjab and Bihar The Children of the Ganga and the Politics of Allocation Last in the South: Economic Growth and Development in Andhra Pradesh The Looming Crisis in Indian Agriculture The Economic Strangulation of Bihar To access these reports.co.25 Reports Authored by Centre for Policy Alternatives • • • • • • • • • • • • Will India Catch-up With China? Left Behind: A Case Study of Assam Towards a New Petroleum Products Pricing Policy Economic Growth and Development of West Bengal: Reality vs.cpasind.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful