This article analyses the influence of industrial disparity and centralisation (concentration) on major industrial states in India. Accordingly, we are using two mathematical models: (a) localisation coefficients to identify major industries that are suffering by industrial concentration and (b) location quotient to measure regional industrial specialisation. Consequently, it shows the natural tendency of distribution of industries in a particular way between the six major Indian industrial states. Therefore, we determine the reasons for lack of industrialisation within those states. Afterwards, this research helps to understand that those regions are either little specialised regions or concentrated with few industries. Especially, policy makers can easily equally distribute through location quotient and localisation coefficient, all manufacturing industries in all six regions. Moreover, this research can reduce the tendency of lack of industrialisation.
AlaghY. K.SubrahnanianK. K.KashayapS. P. (1971). Inter-regional industrial disparity in a developing economy: A conceptual frame with a case study. Journal of Regional Science, 11(3), 301–316.
2.
AmirapuA.HasanR.JiangY.KelvinA. (2019). Geographic concentration in Indian manufacturing and service industries: Evidence from 1998 to 2013. Asian Economic Policy Review, 14(1), 148–168.
3.
Annual Survey of Industry (ASI). (2016–2017). Annual survey of industries (Vol. 1). Govt. of India. http://www.csoisw.gov.in/cms/UploadedFiles/VolumeI_2016_2017.pdf
4.
BrandS. (1997). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output a tables: A comment. Regional Studies, 31(8), 791–794.
5.
Central Statistical Organization. (2008). National industrial classification. Government of India.
6.
ChaudhuriB.SarkarS.PanigrahiA. K. (2014). Chronic problems in industrialization in West Bengal. International Growth Centre (IGC). https://www.theigc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Chaudhuri-et-al-2014.pdf.
7.
EllisonG.GlaeserE. L. (1994). Geographic concentration in US manufacturing industries: A dartboard approach [NBER working paper no. 4840]. National Bureau of Economic Research. www.nber.org/papers/w4840.
8.
EllisonG.GlaeserE. L. (1997). Geographic concentration in US manufacturing industries: A dartboard approach. Journal of Political Economy, 105(5), 889–442.
9.
FleggA. T.TohmoT. (2013). Estimating regional inputs coefficients and multipliers: The use of the FLQ is not a gamble. University of the West of England.
10.
FleggA. T.WebberC. D. (1997). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output tables: Reply. Regional Studies, 31(8), 795–805.
11.
FleggA. T.WebberC. D.ElliotM. V. (1995). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output tables. Regional Studies, 19(6), 547–561.
12.
FloranceS. (1948). Investment, location and size of plant. The Economic Journal, Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Economic Society, 58(231), 411–414.
13.
HaggettP. (1965). Locational analysis in human geography (pp. 33–40). Edward Arnold Ltd.
14.
HandralA. R.AnbukkaniP.KumarP. (2018). Internal labour migration in India: Recent trends and patterns. Annuals of Agricultural Research, 39(2), 1–8.
15.
HooverE. M. (1936). The measurement of industrial localization. Review of Economics and Statistics, 18(4), 162–171.
16.
KrugmanP. (1991). Geography and trade. MIT.
17.
LehtonenO.TykkyläinenM. (2012). Estimating regional input coefficients and multipliers: Is the choice of a non-survey technique a gamble? Regional Studies, 48(2), 1–18.
18.
LuJ.TaoZ. (March 2009).Trends and determinants of China’s industrial agglomeration. Journal of Urban Economics, 65(2), 167–180.
19.
LuZ.FleggA. T.DengX. (2011). Regional specialization: A measure method and the trend in China[MPRA working paper no. 33867]. Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
20.
LuJ.TaoZ. (2005). Regional specialization and inter-region similarity: An empirical analysis of economic geography in China. China Journal of Economics, 1, 29–52.
21.
NorthD. C. (1955). Location theory and regional economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 63(3), 243–258.
22.
PapolaT. S.MauryaN.JenaN. (2011). Inter-regional disparities in industrial growth and structure. Institute for Studies in Industrial Development.
23.
RosenbluthG. (1955). Measures of concentration. In: Business concentration and price policy (pp. 57–99). Princeton University Press.
24.
SaikiaD. (2009). Industrial localization in India under liberalization. Munich Personal RePEC Archive (MPRA).
25.
SaikiaD. (2011). Industrial location under globalization in India: Evidence from unorganized manufacturing industries. Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, 31(2), 1–28.
26.
SanénN. E. A.GamboaJ. M. S. (2016). A methodological proposal for the construction of a regional input-output matrix using a bottom-up approach and its statistical assessment. Investigación Económica, 75(298), 3–56.
27.
SharmaV. N.TiwariA. K. (December 2014). A survey of research in industrial geography in India. Transactions of the Institute of Indian Geographers, 36(2), 185–206.
