Previous Year: Short & Long Questions with Answers - Politics of Planned Development | Political Science Class 12 - Humanities/Arts PDF Download

• It harmonizes the interest of national security and economic unity.
• It prepares strategic and long -term framework of policy and program. 
• It provides  necessary and technical advice to the union government. 
• It acts as a think tank of the union government.

Q.7. How was Kerala plan based on decentralised planning? 
Ans. The ‘Kerala Model‘ is the name given to the path of planning and development charted by the State of Kerala. There has been a focus in this model on education, health, land reform, effective food distribution. The state has also taken initiative to involve people in making plans at the panchayat, block and district level.

Q.8. Which of these statements about the Bombay Plan is incorrect?
(i) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future. 
(ii) It supported state-ownership of industry. 
(iii) It was made by some leading industrialists. 
(iv) It supported strongly the idea of planning.
Ans. (i) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.

Q.9. Which of the following ideas did not form part of the early phase of India’s development policy? 
(i) Planning 
(ii) Liberalisation
(iii) Co-operative Farming 
(iv) Self-sufficiency
Ans. (ii) Liberalisation

Q.10. The idea of planning in India was drawn from : 
(i) The Bombay Plan 
(ii) Experiences of the Soviet bloc countries 
(iii) Gandhian vision of society 
(iv) Demand by peasant organisations. 
(i) (b) and (d) only 
(ii) (d) and (c) only 
(iii) (a) and (b) only 
(iv) All the above
Ans. (iv) All the above

Q.11. Differentiate between the main objectives of the First and Second Five Year Plans. 
Ans. The main points of difference are :
(i) The First Plan focused on land reforms in rural areas, Whereas the Second Plan focused on industrialisation in rural areas.
(ii) The First Plan focused on slow but steady growth of National Income, Whereas the Second Plan focused on rapid industrialisation for overall growth of the economy.

Q.12. Highlight the two areas on which the First Five Year Plan focused. 
Ans. The two areas of focus under the First Five Year Plan were :
(i) Land reforms in rural areas.
(ii) Slow but steady growth of the National Income.

Q.13. Which are the two models of development? Which model of development was adopted by India?
Ans. The models of development are :
(i) The liberal capitalist model
(ii) The socialist model India adopted the model which is a combination of both the models.

Q.14. What were the fears of the tribal population of Orissa and environmentalist about setting up industries in tribal areas?
Ans. 
(i) Displacement of their homes and livelihood.
(ii) Pollution of environment.

Q.15. Critically examine the major outcomes of the Indian model of mixed economy. 
OR
Evaluate the major outcomes of the Indian model of mixed economy.
Ans. Outcomes of the Indian Model of Mixed Economy :
(i) Much of the agriculture, trade and industry were left in private hands.
(ii) The state controlled key heavy industries, provided industrial infrastructure, regulated trade and some crucial interventions in agriculture.
This led to the growth of both private and public sector which became the basis for future development.

Q.16. What were the major differences in the approach towards development at the time of independence? Has the debate been resolved?
Ans. After independence, India had a choice to adopt a capitalist model and become an industrial country like UK and USA or a socialist model and become a welfare country like USSR.
The debate was organised with views being in favour and against both, these economic models. Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru supported the socialist model in the wider interest of the country at large. Pt. Nehru, being the Prime Minister, the mandate of the government was clear to work on the model of social upliftment of the poor, welfare state, redistribution of wealth, etc.
However, there was strong supports in favour of rapid industrialisation along with growth of agriculture and upliftment of the poor.
The debate ended with the devising and adoption  of the model which combined the best of these two models and developed the Mixed Economy model for the country.

Q.17. What was the major thrust of the First Five Year Plan? In which ways did the Second Plan differed from the first one?
Ans. The two areas of focus under the First Five Year Plan were :
(i) Land reforms in rural areas.
(ii) Slow but steady growth of the National Income.
The main points of difference between the First Plan and the Second Plan were :
(i) The First Plan focused on land reforms in rural areas Whereas, the Second Plan focused on industrialisation in rural areas.
(ii) The First Plan focused on slow but steady growth of National Income Whereas,  the Second Plan focused on rapid industrialisation for overall growth of the economy.

Q.18. State the main arguments in the debate that ensued between industrialisation and agricultural development at the time of the Second Five Year Plan.
Ans. The launch of the Second Five Year Plan was preceded by a substantial debate on the preference to industrialisation over agriculture.
The economists like Kumarappa proposed industrialisation as an alternative model for the much needed rapid growth of the economy.
On the other hand, leaders like Chaudhary Charan Singh, advocated the need of focus on agriculture sector only for the growth of the people of the country. He condemned the proposal of growth of industrialisation at the cost of derogation of rural areas.
Some economists combined the two ideologies and proposed that for upliftment of the rural areas, industrialisation is necessary. They proposed that the failure of first plan was not on account of weakness of the policy but was due to its non-implementation by the bureaucrats due to corruption by the land owners.

Q.19. “Indian policy makers made a mistake by emphasising the role of state in the economy. India could have developed much better if private sector was allowed a free play right from the beginning.” Give arguments for or against this proposition.
Ans. At the time of independence, the entire economy was shattered. For reorganisation of the economy, it was inevitable for the government not to interfere in the revival of the economy. Leaving economy in private hands at that time could have resulted in:
(i) No space left for models focusing for the upliftment of the poor and the backward.
(ii) Cut-throat competition in areas of public welfare.
(iii) Uncontrolled growth of corruption and inefficiency.
(iv) Large scale non-compliance with legal system of the country.
The involvement of the state led to: 
(a) Licensing in critical areas of public welfare.
(b) Curb on widening gap between the rich and the poor.
(c) Creation of a new class which had high salaries with less accountability.
So, in my view, it is incorrect to state that a mistake has been made by Indian policy makers by not allowing a free play to the private sector right from the beginning.

Q.20. Evaluate any four benefits of the ‘Green Revolution’.
Ans. Benefits of the Green Revolution :
(i) Increased food production, especially in wheat, followed by enhancement in food security.
(ii) States like UP, Punjab and Haryana became agriculturally prosperous.
(iii) Rise of middle section peasant.
(iv) The farmers with medium size holdings benefitted so much by the changes through the green revolution that they became politically influential.
(v) Polarisation between the classes and regions took place.
(vi) It produced conditions favourable for leftwing organisations to organise the poor peasants.

Q.21. Examine the major outcomes of the Green Revolution. 
Ans. Major outcomes of the Green Revolution
(i) The rich peasants and the large landholders were the major beneficiaries of the process. The green revolution delivered only a moderate agricultural growth (mainly a rise in wheat production) and raised the availability of food in the country, but increased polarisation between classes and regions.
(ii) Some regions like Punjab, Haryana and western Uttar Pradesh became agriculturally prosperous, while others remained backward.
(iii) The green revolution had two other effects : One was that in many parts, the stark contrast between the poor peasantry and the landlords produced conditions favourable for left wing organisations to organise the poor peasants. Secondly, the green revolution also resulted in the rise of what is called the middle peasant section. These were farmers with medium size holdings,
who benefitted from the changes and soon emerged politically influential in many parts of the country.

Q.22. Explain any two merits and any two demerits each of the Green Revolution.
OR
What was the Green Revolution? Mention two positive and two negative consequences of the Green Revolution.
Ans. Green Revolution : It was introduced to bring about revolutionary changes in agriculture especially in agriculture in food grains like wheat and rice to increase food production through highyielding varieties of seeds, synthetic fertilizers and scientific irrigation.
Merits/Positive Consequences :
(i) It increased food production, especially in wheat, followed by enhancement in food security.
(ii) Due to the green revolution, states like UP, Punjab and Haryana became agriculturally prosperous.
(iii) It also resulted in the rise of middle peasant sections.
Demerits/Negative Consequences : 
(i) It increased polarisation between the classes and regions.
(ii) The rich peasants and the large landholders were the major beneficiaries of this process.

Q.1. (a) Highlight any three features of the First Five Year Plan.   [2023]
OR
(b) Highlight any three problems faced by Government of India immediately after independence related to the displaced population.
Ans. (a) Features of First Five Year Plan:
(i) The First Five year Plan addressed mainly the agriculture sector – investment in dams and irrigation.
(ii) The First Five year Plan had preached that India should ‘hasten slowly’ .It focused on land reforms as the key to the country’s development.
(iii) One of its basic aim was to raise the level of national income.
(iv) The planners sought to push savings up.
OR
(b) Problems:
(i) Rehabilitation of the displaced population.
(ii) To maintain peace in the areas that witnessed communal violence.
(iii) To settle the problems of minorities.
(iv) To build confidence among the displaced who had suffered mentally, physically, emotionally.  

Q.2. Assess the outcomes of the early phase of planned development in India.
Ans. Outcomes of planning in India are positive as well as negative which are as follow:
Achievements 
(i) In the early phase of planned development, the foundations of India’s future economic growth were laid. Some of the largest developmental projects in India’s history were undertaken during this period. These included mega-dams like Bhakhra-Nangal and Hirakud for irrigation and power generation.
(ii) Some of the heavy industries in the public sector  - steel plants, oil refineries, manufacturing units, defense production etc. were started during this period. Infrastructure for transport and communication was improved substantially.
(iii) Much of the later economic growth, including that by the private sector, may not have been possible in the absence of these foundations.
Limitations 
(i) Land reforms did not take place effectively in most parts of the country; political power remained in the hands of the landowning classes; and big industrialists continued to benefit and thrive while poverty did not reduce much.
(ii) The early initiatives for planned development were at best realizing the goals of economic development of the country and well being of all its citizens. The inability to take significant step in this direction in the very first stage was to become a political problem.
(iii) Those who benefitted from unequal development soon became politically powerful and made it even more difficult to move in the desired direction.

Q.3. Read the following passage :
“In the early years of Independence, two contradictory tendencies were already well advanced inside the Congress Party. On the one hand, the national party executive endorsed socialist principles of state ownership, regulation and control over key sectors of the economy in order to improve productivity and at the same time curb economic concentration. On the other hand, the national Congress government pursued liberal economic policies and incentives to private investment that was justified in terms of the sole criterion of achieving maximum increase in production.”
(i) What is the contradiction that the author is talking about? What would be the political implications of a contradiction like this?
(ii) If the author is correct, why is it that the Congress was pursuing this policy? Was it related to the nature of the opposition parties?
(iii) Was there also a contradiction between the central leadership of the Congress party and its state level leaders?
Ans. 
(i) The author of the passage is discussing about the contradiction in adoption of models and devising the policies. The political implications of this are that there was a difference of opinion between various members of the party. It may also point to making the licensing norms strict so as to ensure that only the deserving get the benefit.
(ii) The purpose behind adoption of this policy by the Congress was to increase production. It was surely related to the nature of opposition parties which focused more on liberalisation and globalisation of the economy.
(iii) This does not point out that there was a contradiction between the central leadership and the state leadership of the Congress party. At both levels, the aim was the same.