PLANNING IN INDIA

BY

DEEPAK T 2015701545
HARSHA S 2015701548
JANANI M 2015701549
SNEHA P 2015701567
SOWMIYAA S 2015701568
● The Commission was appointed by Royal Warrant
dated 8 July 1937 under the Chairmanship of the
Rt. Hon. Sir Montague Barlow (later known as Sir
Anderson Montague-Barlow)

● To investigate the causes of the existing

distribution of the industrial population, future
trends and the social, economic and strategic
disadvantages of concentration and to propose
remedies.

● The immediate stimulus for the enquiry came

from the Third Report of the Commissioner for the
Special Areas published in 1936.
● This report related the Special Areas to the
problem of the distribution of industry, drawing
attention to the imbalance in industrial
production

● The distribution of industrial population arising

from the decline of the older industrial areas on
the coalfields and in the hinterland of ports and
the artificial concentration of light industry and
distributive trades in the Greater London area.

● It also suggested the restriction of factory

construction in the Metropolitan area and the
institution of financial inducements to attract
industries to the Special Areas.
 As the Barlow Commission pointed out,

‘ The concentration of population in the greater towns, especially since

the Industrial Revolution of more than a century ago, has been marked
by a disastrous harvest of slums, sickness, stunted population, and
human misery from which the nation su ered in mid-Victorian years,
and continues, through fortunately to a much lesser extent, to su er
today’.
EVOLUTION OF THE COMMISSION IN EUROPE
● The Town and Country Planning Act,1944 simplified the purchase of land. The delay in the purchase of land development was
greatly cut.

● The Act particularly dealt with areas badly damaged on accounting of lightning war due to excess bombing by the Germans in World
War II, the areas which had bay layout and obsolete pattern of development, and the areas where industry and population was
shifting during the war.

● These were the areas which badly needed planning and development. This Act was supplemented by the Distribution of Industry
Act, 1945.

● It was passed on the recommendation of the ‘Barlow Commission’ which enquired into the geographical distribution of industrial
population in 1942.

● It changed the nomenclature of “distressed areas” to “developmental areas”.

● It listed the developmental areas and laid down that the central government can create places as development areas.

● The Minister can make grant or loans for the establishment of industry or the development of the area.

● The dire consequences of haphazard growth soon become painfully obvious in a vast industrial and commercial centre.

● It is the reason that all big cities of the world have some sort of planning or the other, such as, London, Paris, Moscow, Chicago,
New York and Delhi
BEGINNING OF BARLOW COMMISSION
● In beginning of the century, the relationship between social issues and town planning was slowly being realised. Then,
Frederick Osborn referred urban problems collectively as the ‘urban disease’
● In 1909 a greater understanding of the ‘urban disease’ saw Britain's first town planning legislation created. Although
technically opposed to fringe development, the Housing, Town Planning. Act 1909 did not prevent it.
● Instead, in light of recent success with the development of Hampstead Garden Suburb, the Act, realising that suburbs were
easier to develop than towns, held the ethos that good suburbs were better than bad ones. Moreover, new towns required
government direction which was beyond the scope of municipal powers alone.
● Towards the end of the First World War the Garden City principles were reasserted by the ‘New Townsmen’ referring to the
success of Letchworth, proposed 100 government-supported new towns to address post-war rebuilding. Conversely, some
attempts were made at designing rebuilding e orts as satellite towns such as Manchester's Wythenshawe and Liverpool's
Speke and Knowsley which also included provisions for industry. These were still extensions of existing cities and not true
New Towns.
THE BARLOW ROYAL COMMISSION
● During the inter-war years Government committees studied the problem of urban concentration with the Committee on
Unhealthy Areas, chaired by Neville Chamberlain (1919-1921), recommending the restriction of further industry in London
and the relocation of some of the city's existing industry to garden cities. Although nothing came of these studies they
became the origin of Chamberlain's urban decentralisation interests which led to his setting up of the Barlow Commission
once Prime Minister.
● In 1938 Chamberlain, as the new Prime Minister, assigned a Royal Commission chaired by Sir Anderson Barlow into the
urban concentration of population and industry. The resulting report raised the problem of large towns as a public issue
for the first time and concluded that ‘planned decentralisation’ was favourable. However, owing to the outbreak of war in
1939 the Barlow Report, published in 1940, was initially ignored due to more immediate priorities although it eventually
became a turning point for New Towns policy
● The damage brought on by the Second World War provoked significant public interest in what post-war Britain would be
like which was encouraged by the Government who facilitated talk about a ‘Better Britain’ to boost morale. Furthermore,
the Ministry of Works and Building was commissioned to draft ideas. Ironically, the Barlow Report was quickly turned to as
a best practice document
Plan and Legislation
● In 1942, following the Report's recommendation, the Government chose to create a central planning authority in the form
of the Ministry of Works and Planning. More importantly the Government also announced that the Report's
decentralisation and relocation of population and industry initiatives would be followed.
● Post-war rebuilding initiatives saw new plans drafted for London which for the first time addressed the issue of
decentralisation. Firstly, the County of London Plan 1943 recognised that displacement of population and employment was
necessary if the city was to be rebuilt at a desirable density.
● Moreover, the Greater London Plan of 1944 went further by suggesting that over one million people would need to be
displaced into a mixture of satellite suburbs, existing rural towns, and new towns
● In 1945 the New Towns Committee was formed to consider the “establishment, development, organisation, and
administration” of new towns. Within eight months the committee had completed a highly comprehensive study into these
issues resulting in positive recommendations for the construction of new towns.
New Towns in Britain
● It was in 1946 that the hard work of the ‘New Townsmen’ finally paid o with the passing of the New Towns Act 1946.
Swayed by the need for post-war reconstruction, more housing, and a call to halt any further expansion of London's girth,
authorities saw that there was no alternative to the New Town solution.
● In total, 27 New Towns were built after 1946. Some of them were Stevenage, Crawley, Hemel Hempstead, Harlow, Newton
Aycli e, Peterlee and Washington in the North East; Glenrothes, Cumbernauld, Livingston and Irvine.
● Towns that were expanded under the new towns act were Peterborough, Northampton, Warrington, Ipswich and
Preston-Leyland-Chorley.
The New Towns Movement around the World

● There were similar problems for New Towns advocates in other areas of the world. In Hong Kong, the new towns were
developed as an initiative from the British colonial government.
● In other areas although they understood the concept and approved in large numbers, planners had trouble convincing their
own governments or agencies of the merits of the proposal. In the United States, it was not until the 1960s that New
Towns policies were put in place, although after World War Two grants had been extended for such things as slum
clearance, improved and increased housing, and road construction, and in the 1950s, to ‘comprehensive renewal projects’
PLANNING COMMISSION IN INDIA - HISTORY

● The Planning Commission was set up by a resolution of the government in march 1950 in pursuance of declared
objectives of the Government to promote a rapid rise in the standard of living of the people by efficient exploitation
of the resources of the country, increasing production and o ering opportunities to all for employment in the
service of the community.

OBJECTIVES

After independence, India was in dire conditions and needed to start acting soon

Some of the problems necessitated need for an immediate plan:

● Vicious circle of poverty

● Foreign Trade
● Need for Rapid industrialization
● Population pressure
● Development of Natural resources Capital Deficiency & Market imperfections
● To increase food production.
FUNCTIONS OF PLANNING COMMISSION IN INDIA

● To formulate a plan for the most e ective and balanced utilization of country's resources.
● To define the stages, on the basis of priority, in which the plan should be carried out and propose the
allocation of resources for the due completion of each stage.
● To indicate the factors that tends to retard economic development.
● To determine the conditions which need to be established for the successful execution of the plan.
● To determine the nature of the machinery required for securing the successful implementation of each
stage of the plan.
● To appraise from time to time the progress achieved in the execution of each stage of the plan and also
recommend the necessary adjustments of policy and measures necessary for successful implementation of
plan.
● To achieve public co-operation in national development.
● Hill Areas Development Programme
● Perspective Planning
PLANNING COMMISSION IN INDIA

● The first Five-year Plan was launched in 1951 and two subsequent five-year plans were formulated till
1965, when there was a break because of the Indo-Pakistan Conflict. Two successive years of drought,
devaluation of the currency, a general rise in prices and erosion of resources disrupted the planning
process and after three Annual Plans between 1966 and 1969, the fourth Five-year plan was started in
1969.
● The Eighth Plan could not take o in 1990 due to the fast changing political situation at the Centre and the
years 1990-91 and 1991-92 were treated as Annual Plans. The Eighth Plan was finally launched in 1992
after the initiation of structural adjustment policies.
● For the first eight Plans the emphasis was on a growing public sector with massive investments in basic
and heavy industries, but since the launch of the Ninth Plan in 1997, the emphasis on the public sector has
become less pronounced and the current thinking on planning in the country, in general, is that it should
increasingly be of an indicative nature
PLANNING COMMISSION IN INDIA - 5 YEAR PLAN
1. First Five Year Plan:

● It was made for the duration of 1951 to 1956.

● It was based on the Harrod-Domar model.
● Its main focus was on the agricultural development of the country.
● This plan was successful and achieved growth rate of 3.6% (more than its target)

2. Second Five Year Plan:

● It was made for the duration of 1956 to 1961.

● It was based on the P.C. Mahalanobis Model.
● Its main focus was on the industrial development of the country.
● This plan was successful and achieved growth rate of 4.1%

3. Third Five Year Plan:

● It was made for the duration of 1961 to 1966.

● This plan is called ‘Gadgil Yojna’ also.
● The main target of this plan was to make the economy independent and to reach self active position of take o .
● Due to china war, this plan could not achieve its growth target of 5.6%
 4. Plan Holiday:

● The duration of plan holiday was from 1966 to 1969.

● The main reason behind the plan holiday was the Indo-Pakistan war & failure of third plan.
● During this plan annual plans were made and equal priority was given to agriculture its allied sectors and
the industry sector.

5. Fourth Five Year Plan:

● Its duration was from 1969 to 1974.

● There were two main objective of this plan i.e. growth with stability and progressive achievement of self
reliance.
● During this plan the slogan of “Garibi Hatao” is given during the 1971 elections by Indira Gandhi.
● This plan failed and could achieve growth rate of 3.3% only against the target of 5.7%.

6. Fifth Five Year Plan:

● Its duration was 1974 to 1979.

● In this plan top priority was given to agriculture, next came to industry and mines.
● Overall this plan was successful which achieved the growth of 4.8% against the target of 4.4%.
Basic Objectives of five year plan
The main objective of the Five-Year Plan was to correct historical inequalities and increase the economic
growth in the country. Other aspects which constituted the Five-Year Plan were:
● Population control.
● Generating employment by giving priority to agriculture and rural development.
● Reduction of poverty.
● Ensuring proper availability of food and water for the poor.
● Availability of primary health care facilities and other basic necessities.
● Primary education to all children in the country.
● Empowering the socially disadvantaged classes like Scheduled castes, Scheduled tribes and other
backward classes.
● Developing self-reliance in terms of agriculture.
● Acceleration in the growth rate of the economy with the help of stable prices.
Benefits of Five-Year Plans of India
● Most communist states and several capitalist countries subsequently have adopted them.
● The First Five-Year Plan was one of the most important, because it had a great role in the launching
of Indian development after Independence. Thus, it strongly supported agriculture production and
also launched the industrialization of the country. It built a particular system of mixed economy, with
a great role for the public sector, as well as a growing private sector.
● Provided services like electricity, telecommunication, railways etc.
● Special plans to empower the socially disadvantaged classes of the country.
● Involvement and participation of Panchayati Raj institutions/bodies and Nagar Palikas in the
development process.
● Expansion of transport and communication.
Shortcomings in Planning Commission in India

● First, Indian Plans are ambitious. Most of the plan objectives remain unfulfilled. Again, some of the
objectives are not quantifiable, Furthermore, desired objectives never match with the actual results.
● Secondly, Indian plans suffer from inconsistency of the objectives that are set. For instance, the
objective of accumulation of capital is inconsistent with the objective of reduction of income
disparities.
● Higher economic growth objective may not commensurate with the employment generation
objective. Rapid economic growth requires the use of capital-intensive technology which is, by
nature, labour-displacing.
● Despite these shortcomings of Indian planning, we must say that the objective of higher economic
growth is the most fundamental of all. Plan objectives must be spelt out as to make them consistent
with the country’s needs.
How World War II changed India

● The origins of the model of planned economic development adopted by independent India was a
direct consequence of the war.
● The war provided an opportunity for groups at the margins of Indian society to find new avenues for
mobility.
● The war also led to the emergence of India as a major Asian power and set the stage for it to play a
wider role in international politics.
● The Partition of India was the division of British India in 1947 which accompanied the creation of
two independent dominions, India and Pakistan.
Characteristics of Planning
(i) Five Year Planning:
● Though India’s plans are of a 5-year period, such planning is linked with a long term view. Sino-India War (1962), Indo-Pak
War (1965), and the unprecedented drought in the mid-60s forced to adopt the approach of ‘plan holiday’ from the 4th
Five Year Plan.
● Instead of a regular 5 Year Plan, planning was discontinued through three ad hoc Annual Plans during the period 1966-69.
● Again, with assumption of power by the Janata Government in 1977, rolling plan on a year to year basis or the 6th Plan had
been formulated for the period 1978-83. In 1980, this rolling plan concept was discontinued by the Congress (I)
Government much ahead of the scheduled time and the 6th Plan came into operation from 1980 and continued till 1985.
Because of unprecedented political crisis in New Delhi and frequent changes of power, the 8th Five Year Plan scheduled
for the period 1990-95 could not be launched.
● The Eighth Five Year Plan was delayed by two years, though the years 1990-91 and 1991-92 had not been projected as
‘plan holiday’. The Eighth Five Year Plan came into operation in 1992. Since then there has been no break from the five
year planning system.
Characteristics of Planning
(ii) Developmental Planning:
● Indian planning is of the developmental variety. To build up a self-reliant economy, overall economic development of the
country received top priority. However, short term problems like refugee rehabilitation, food crises, foreign exchange
shortage also got due attention from the planners.

(iii) Comprehensive Planning:

● Indian planning is comprehensive in character in the sense that it not only undertakes economic programmes but also puts
emphasis on changes in institutional structures and cultures. It emphasies both on the development of agriculture,
industry, transport and communications and physical infrastructures and social infrastructures such as literacy, health,
population control, environment, etc.
● Planning programmes are also initiated for the development of lower castes and backward classes so that these people
are involved in the development processes.
Characteristics of Planning
(iv) Indicative Planning:
● Indian planning before 1991 was of the nature of directive planning and averse to the role of market mechanism. As far as
resource allocation in the governmental sector was concerned, the government did not rely on the market but gave
directions so that resources could be utilised by all the states efficiently. Private initiative and freedom was allowed but
not in an unhindered way. Private industrialists were encouraged for making investments but, at the same time, they came
under strong control and regulation.
● Thus, flexibility is one of the important hallmarks of indicative planning. Earlier, Indian planning was also of indicative
character. But the Eighth Plan had made it more so and had redefined the role and functions of the Planning Commission.

(v) Democratic Planning:

● Indian planning is democratic planning. The chief building block of laying down the national plan is the Planning
Commission. It is a decision-making body that formulates five year plans and implement them in a democratic spirit and
frame. Discussions are held periodically between the people’s representatives, industrialists, chambers of commerce,
educationists, and many other bodies as well as the members of the Planning Commission.
Characteristics of Planning
(vi) Decentralised Planning or Planning from Below:
● Being democratic planning, Indian planning is essentially a decentralised type of plan. Until the Fourth Plan, planning at
the national level was essentially macro planning. In other words, there was very little or no provision for micro plartning,
i.e., planning from below.
● While ‘macroplan’ provides a broad framework, a ‘microplan’ chalks out all the details in and fixes priorities for di erent
regions depending on their specific needs.
● A macroplan cannot deal with the problems of the remotest regions of the country. A macroplan does not involve people
straightforward. However, for an all round growth of every region—small or big—planning has to be decentralised in
which local people, local institutions and local governance are asked to participate. This is called ‘participatory
development’.
● Participation of the community is needed to deal with the local problems, local resources, local priorities, etc. In this way,
the concept of planning from bottom-to-top rather than top-to-down is more popular in India.