The study attempts to measure the productivity performance in terms of total factor productivity (TFP) growth of the Indian Iron and Steel Industry for the entire period, 1997–1998 to 2016–2017, at both national and regional levels. Output growth is decomposed into the perspiration, component (factor accumulation) and inspiration component (TFP growth). The Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) based Malmquist Productivity Index has been used as a technique to obtain TFP growth. It is deduced that the inspiration component of output growth (i.e., TFP growth) is contributing significantly as the growth of TFP in the Indian Iron and Steel Industry has been found to be growing at an average growth rate of 10.28% per annum. However, a negative growth of the perspiration component to the tune of −7.99% per annum has restricted the Indian Iron and Steel Industry from achieving potential growth rates. If we assume that input growth is zero, the industry must grow at a potential growth rate equal to the TFP growth of 10.28%. However, if the growth of the input becomes positive, the industry can record much higher growth rates of Iron and Steel output.
AbramovitzM. (1956). Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870[Occasional paper number 52] (pp. 1–23). National Bureau of Economic Research.
2.
AfriatS. N. (1972). Efficiency estimation of production function. International Economic Review, 13(3), 368–598. https://doi.org/10.2307/2525845
3.
AhluwaliaI. J. (1991). Productivity and growth in Indian manufacturing. Oxford University Press.
4.
AnandalingamG. (1987). Process modelling under uncertainty: Simulation analysis of Indian steel. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 38(2), 115–125.
5.
ArabR. O., MasoumiS. S., & BaratiA. (2015). Financial performance of the steel industry in India: A critical analysis. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 23(6), 1085–1090.
6.
BankerR. D., CharnesA., & CooperW. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092.
7.
BhuniaA. (2007). Liquidity management of public sector iron and steel enterprises in India. Vidyasagar University Journal of Commerce, 12, 85–98.
8.
BrushJ. E. (1952). The iron and steel industry in India. Geographical Review, 42(1), 37–55.
9.
CavesD. W., ChristensenL. R., & DiewertW. E. (1982). The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity. Econometrica, 50(6), 1393–1414.
10.
CharS. V. (1981). Experiments in steel pricing. Economic & Political Weekly, 16(9), 333–338.
11.
ChellasamyP., & SelvakumarR. (2017). Productivity analysis of select steel companies in India. International Journal of Advanced Research and Development, 2(5), 456–460.
12.
D’CostaA. P. (1999). Overcoming structural barriers: Steel industries in Brazil, India and Korea. Economic & Political Weekly, 34(9), M2–M16.
13.
DenisonE. F. (1962). Sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternatives before us. Committee for Economic Development.
14.
DhamiJ. K., SinghH., & GuptaM. (2013). Industrialization at the cost of environment degradation—A case of leather and iron and steel industry from Punjab economy. Innovative Journal of Business and Management, 2(1), 19–21.
15.
DholakiaB. H. (1977). Measurement of capital input and estimation of time series production functions in Indian manufacture. Indian Economic Journal, 24(3), 333.
16.
FabricantS. (1954). Economic progress and economic change. National Bureau of Economic Research.
17.
FareR., GrosskopfS., NorrisM., & ZhangZ. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. The American Economic Review, 84(1), 66–83.
18.
FarrellM. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (General), 120(3), 253–281.
19.
FirozA. S. (2005). Investment in steel industry: Some policy issues. Economic & Political Weekly, 40(14), 1427–1431.
20.
GrilichesZ., & JorgensonD. (1966). Sources of measured productivity change: Capital input. The American Economic Review, 56(2), 50–61.
21.
GrilichesZ., & LichtenbergF. R. (1984). R&D and productivity growth at the industry level: is there still a relationship? In R&D, patents, and productivity (pp. 465–502). University of Chicago Press.
22.
JorgensonD. W., & GrilichesZ. (1967). The explanation of productivity change. The Review of Economic Studies, 34(3), 249–283.
23.
GrossmanG. M., & HelpmanE. (1991). Trade, knowledge spillovers, and growth. European Economic Review, 35(2–3), 517–526.
24.
KalirajanK. P., & ShandR. T. (1997). Sources of output growth in Indian agriculture. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 52(4), 693–706.
25.
KendrickJ. W. (1961). Front matter, productivity trends in the United States. National Bureau of Economic Research. Princeton University Press.
26.
KrugmanP. (1994). The age of diminishing expectations: U.S. Economic Policy in the 1990s (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
27.
KumarP. S. (2013). Total factor productivity trends in selected Indian steel firms. Paripex—Indian Journal of Research, 2(1), 35–37.
28.
KumarS. (2021). Structural changes and competitiveness of the steel industry in India: Assessed by productivity growth post economic reforms. International Journal of Global Business and Competitiveness, 16(1), 39–50.
29.
LoganathanS. (2015). A review of labor productivity research in construction. International Journal of Technology, 5(2), 91–99.
30.
ManglaS. K. (2018). Trade liberalization and firm-level productivity: A panel data analysis of the Indian iron-steel industry. Economic Annals, 63(219), 7–32.
31.
ManglaS. K. (2023). Trade liberalization and industry level productivity in Indian iron–steel and cement industries: Evidences from post-reform period. Thailand and the World Economy, 41(1), 1–34.
32.
Ministry of Steel (MoS), Government of India. (2018). Developments of Indian Steel Sector since 1991. https://steel.gov.in/sites/default/files/development_Since1991_27December2018.pdf
33.
MohamedA. A. S. (2013). Environmental performance of companies in the iron and steel industry. Accounting issues. Anale. Seria Ştiinţe Economice. Timişoara, 19(19), 13–18.
34.
NadiriM. I. (1970). Some approaches to the theory and measurement of total factor productivity: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 8(4), 1137–1177.
35.
NagarajK. (1977). Iron and steel. Social Scientist, 5(11), 139–159.
36.
NorsworthyJ., & JangS. L. (1993). Cost function estimation of quality change in semiconductors. In Price measurements and their uses (pp. 125–156). University of Chicago Press.
37.
PalM. K. (2012). Manufacturing productivity growth in India and West Bengal: A liberalization period analysis. Vidyasagar University Journal of Economics, 9, 1–18.
38.
ParkinsonE. V. (1950). The development of the iron and steel industry in India. Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 98(4824), 668–685.
39.
PorterM. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of notions. Harvard Business Review, 73, 91.
40.
RaoB., & OwyongD. (1997). Sources of growth in the Singapore economy: Some new results [Conference session]. Taipei International Conference on Efficiency and Productivity Growth, Academia Sinica.
41.
RayS., & PalM. K. (2010). Trend in total factor productivity growth in Indian iron and steel industries under a liberalized trade regime: an empirical analysis with adjustment for capacity utilization. Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 11(3), 55–74.
42.
Ruhul AminM., & BanerjeeS. (2010). Benchmarking environmental performance: Five leading steel mills in India. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 17(3), 378–395.
43.
SargentT. C., & RodriguezE. R. (2001). Labour or total factor productivity: Do we need to choose?Department of Finance.
44.
SchererF. M. (1982). Inter-industry technology flows and productivity growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 64(4), 672–634.
45.
SchererF. M. (1987). Antitrust, efficiency, and progress. New York University Law Review, 62, 998.
46.
SchmooklerJ. (1952), The changing efficiency of the American Economy 1869–1938. Review of Economics and Statistics, 34(3), 145–160.
47.
SchultzT. W. (1975). The value of the ability to deal with disequilibria. Journal of Economic Literature, 13(3), 827–846.
48.
ShephardR. W. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. Econometrica, 38(4), 748–758.
49.
SivakumarS. (2013). A study on financial efficiency of steel industry in India. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Management Research (IJAFMR), 3(1), 11–26. http://www.tjprc.org/publishpapers/2-35-1356087168-2.JAFMR%20-%20A%20Study%20full.pdf
50.
SofatY. (2017). Study of employees welfare with special reference to Star Light Hosiery Mills, Ludhiana. International Journal of Research in management, Economics and Commerce, 7(1), 71–75.
51.
SolowR. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65–94.
52.
SolowR. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312–320.
53.
TerleckyjN. E. (1974). Effects of R&D on the productivity growth of industries: An exploratory study(No. 140). National Planning Association.
54.
ThanassoulisE. (2000). DEA and its use in the regulation of water companies. European Journal of Operational Research, 127(1), 1–13.
55.
TinbergenJ. (1942). Zur theorie der langfristigen wirtschaftsentwicklung. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 56, 511–549.
56.
World Steel Association (WSA). (2023). Steel Statistical Yearbook—1992 & 1999. https://www.worldsteel.org/
57.
YoungA. (1992). A tale of two cities: Factor accumulation and technical change in Hong Kong and Singapore. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 7, 13–54.
58.
YoungA. (1995). The tyranny of numbers: Confronting the statistical realities of the East Asian growth experience. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 641–680.
