The economic de-industrialisation of India refers a period of reduction in industrial based activities within the Indian economy from 1757 to 1947. The process of de-industrialisation is an economic change in which employment in the manufacturing sector declines due to various economic or political reasons.[1] The decline in employment in manufacturing is also followed by the fall in the share of manufacturing value added in GDP. The process of de-industrialisation can be due to development and growth in the economy and it can also occur due to political factors.
The initial concept of Indian de-industrialisation was introduced by Sir William Bentinck who acted as the Governor-General of India between 1833 and 1835. His policy significantly impacted the cotton industry of India. The effect of British cotton industry on Indian cotton industry was originally presented by Karl Marx in Das Kapital.[2][failed verification]
The deindustrialisation of India started when the Indian economy was colonised under the British Empire. The Indian economy was ruled under the British East Indian Company Rule from 1757 to 1858. This ruling period mainly involved British protectionist policies, restricting sales of Indian goods and services within Britain while exposing Indian markets to British goods and services, including the introduction of machine-made goods, without tariffs and quotas. By the 19th century, the British empire had overtaken the Indian economy as the world's largest textile manufacturer. From 1858, the Indian economy was ruled directly under the British imperial rule, also known as the Rule under the British Raj. India continued to be ruled directly under the British until the end of the colonial period in 1947.
Some scholars theorize that the de-industrialisation processes observed in India were a product of colonial rule. The Industrial Revolution in Europe was followed by a significant decline in the artisan and manufacturing activities in several European colonies in Asia such as India.[3]
Prior to the colonisation of India, the country had reached significant fineness in the production of luxury products in the form of handicrafts. These luxury goods consisted of cotton, silk, and ivory which had a significant market in Europe.[4] Before mercantilism, these products were transferred to the European market through Arab traders and these products were considered very significant in bringing gold, silver and other valuable exchange items into the Arab countries. During the period of Mercantilism, the link between European markets and Indian subcontinent became more direct and trade became easier. The rising import of Indian cotton into Europe created significant competition for the British wool industry.[5]
The GDP per capita of India, as a percent of the British level, declined during the seventeenth and eighteenth century period from over 60% of the British level to 15% by 1871.[6] The period from 1600 to 1871 saw an annual population growth rate of 0.22%. Industry and commerce grew rapidly during the same phase, driven particularly by exports. The production of Mughal India was around 25% of the global industry output in the early phase of 18th century. The major products exported to Europe included indigo, cotton textiles, spices, silks and peppers. The wealthiest province of Bengal Subah which generated 50% of the GDP and 12% world GDP was prominent in textile manufacturing, especially Muslin trade.[6] Indian cultivators began extensive cultivation of maize and tobacco with increased yields due to improvements in the irrigation system. The growth in the agriculture sector expanded slowly and since it was the largest sector, total output growth was quite modest. The major exports in the manufacturing industry included steel, shipbuilding and textiles. This led to the steady reduction in GDP per capita during this period before stabilizing a bit in the 19th century.[citation needed]
With the introduction of British East India Company and after collection of right to revenue rights, it stopped importing gold and silver earlier used in payment for exports from India. The period from 1780 to 1860 saw dynamic shift of India's economy from processed goods exporter to raw materials and buyer of manufactured goods. Fine cotton silk exported was shifted to raw materials consisting opium, indigo and raw cotton. The cotton mill industries of the British even began to lobby government for import tax to India. The infrastructure created by the British colonial government, including legal systems, railways and telegraphs are considered towards resource exploitation, leaving industrial growth static and agriculture unable to keep up with growing population.[citation needed] The industry output from India declined to 2% of world's output in 1900. Britain also replaced India as the largest textile manufacturer of the world.
Indian GDP per capitaDiagram of the Mughal Empire
The economy of the Mughal Empire is well known for the building of the Mughal Road system, establishing the Rupee as a standardised currency, and the unification of the country.[7] Prior to deindustrialisation, India was one of the largest economies in the world, accounting for approximately one quarter of the global economy. Mughal India is considered to be one of the richest periods among early modern Islamic cultures.[8] The Indian economy specialised in industrialisation and manufacturing, accounting for at least one quarter of the world's manufacturing output before the 18th century.[9]
Under the Mughal Empire, agricultural production had increased particularly food crops such as barley, rice and wheat and other non-food crops such as opium and cotton. By the middle of the 17th century, India had begun to grow large amounts of foreign crops including maize and tobacco.[10]
The downfall of Mughal Empire also led to the problems of aggregate supply for Indian manufactured goods. Other explanations for causes include the revolution in world transport and productivity gains by Britain from cottage production to factory goods resulted in uneconomic production in India. This resulted in Britain initially gaining control over export market and then domestic market as well.[2] Therefore, India experienced the phase of deindustrialisation after 1810 because of favour in terms of trade shocks and free commitment of trade between the trading patterns for colonial rulers.[clarification needed]
The Company Rule in India refers to areas in the Indian subcontinent which were under the rule of British East Indian Company. The East Indian Company began its rule over the Indian subcontinent starting with the Battle of Plessey, which ultimately led to the vanquishing of the Bengal Subah and the founding of the Bengal Presidency in 1765, one of the largest subdivisions of British India.[11]
An East Indian Company Merchant Ship used during the Company Rule for transport of cargo and labourers
Capital amassed from Bengal following the Battle of Plessey assisted in investment in textile manufacturing during textile manufacture during the Industrial Revolution,[12] increasing the wealth of the British [13] and ultimately contributing to deindustrialisation in Bengal. Furthermore, under Company rule, large Indian markets were exposed to British goods which were sold in India without any forms of protection while local Indian producers were heavily taxed. Protectionist policies were set up by the British empire to restrict the sale of Indian good and services overseas although raw materials used in textile manufacturing such as cotton were imported to Britain factories and worked.[14] These manufactured textiles were resold by the British in India and eventually led to the British Industrial Revolution, resulting in Britain overtaking India as the largest cotton textile manufacturer in the world by the 19th century.[15]Economic policies implemented by Britain allowed for a monopoly over India's large market and cotton resources and turned India into a captive market for Britain.[16]
Following the annexation of Oudh under British rule in 1856, all of the Indian subcontinent up to the Himalayas and most of Burma was ruled by the Company or local rulers which were allied with the Company at the tie.[17] During the Company rule period, the British East Indian Company had established four main headquarters across the Indian subcontinent. The major British territories across the Indian subcontinent included the Bengal Presidency, Bombay Presidency, Madras Presidency and the North-Western Provinces.[18]
The Company rule and the expansion of the British East India Company continued up until the Indian Rebellion of 1857. Ultimately, the Company rule ended with the Government of India Act 1858 following the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857,[19] although the British East India Company was formally dissolved by Act of Parliament in 1874.[17]
Cause of de-industrialisation in India
In the period between 1775 and 1800, significant innovations occurred in the British cotton[where?] industry which increased their total output and the cost of the production declined. This created significant challenges for cotton producers in India where prices were high. During the same time period, the influence of the British empire increased in the eastern hemisphere as did their control over the Indian sub-continent. British colonial rulers of India considered the need for increasing the market for British produced cotton.[3] British cotton was often produced in surplus quantity by using sophisticated machinery and was exported to the British colonies where it faced competition from indigenous cotton producers. The prices of the British cotton industry were reduced to significantly increase the dominance of British cotton, and unfair taxes were imposed on local producers.[20][21] This led to a decline in the indigenous cotton industry of the colonies and the domestic activities associated with the production of Indian cotton fell. The fall of the Indian cotton industry is one of the important factors behind the decline of Indian GDP under British rule. The standard of living in Britain increased from the middle of the seventeenth century and in the same period, the standard of living in India decreased significantly. During the 1700s, Indian GDP was 60 percent of British GDP and by the end of the 19th century it decreased to less than 15 percent in comparison.[22]
The fall in the hegemony of Mughals reduced the overall productivity of agriculture and reduced the supply of grains.[2] The grain was the primary consumption good for the Indian workers and was non-tradeable. The reduction in the supply of grain resulted in the rise of its prices. This rise in prices and negative supply shock led to a rise in the nominal wages in the cotton and weaving industry. The increased competition from British cotton and rising nominal wages reduced the profitability of the cotton industry of India. Thus, the negative supply shock in agricultural production is also an important reason behind the de-industrialisation of cotton–industries.
The short run as well as long run impact on living standards and growth rate of GDP providing agriculture sector competitive advantage with strengthening of the productivity advance on the land at home or increasing openness to world in turn increases GDP in the short run.[clarification needed][2] The causes of de-industrialisation are region or country specific as in the case of India in the 19th and 20th century. The colonial rule under the British led to the decline of textile and handicrafts industries through their policies and introduction of machine made goods in to the Indian market. Some of the causes of de-industrialisation in India during that period were:
Introduction of machine made goods in the Indian subcontinent at a cheaper rate, which led to the decline of the traditional textile industry of India.
Tariff policy opted by the British led to the decline of the handicraft industry, the British government started using preferential trade policies under which British goods were entering in India duty free or no nominal duty payment while Indian exporters had to pay high duty to export goods to British Mainland. Local producers were also subject to a tax (3-10%) to put them on equal footing with British imports that were subject to a tax of the same magnitude.[20]
Internal Causes, as there were no efforts made to explore products for the Indian markets, the international trade market was in the control of international traders, the manually skilled laborers and traders associated with it were at the pity of the international trade merchants as far as supply or demand propagation in international trade markets was concerned. The guilds or craftsmen organization was also definitely very weak in India as compared to other nations.[citation needed]
Changes in social conditions that resulted in consistent decline in manufacturing employment that requires access to raw materials and natural resources.[2]
British rule establishment also resulted in the loss of powers of the craftsmen organization and other bodies that used to supervise and regulate the trade, which results in the fall down of raw materials as well as the skilled laborers which further results in the decline of market value of the products.[citation needed]
The abolition of court culture and urban aristocrats resulted in decreased demand for these handicrafts as product demand for these dried up.[citation needed]
The rule of the Indian economy under the British Raj refers to the period of the British's direct imperial rule over India from 1858 to 1947, which mainly arose due to revolt against the Company rule by Indians. This marked the formal conquest of India by the British.[3]
An early railway tram used to transport sugar during 1898.
Under rule of the British Raj, the Indian economy was in a state of stagflation and further deindustrialisation while the British economy went through the Industrial Revolution.[23] Several economic policies implemented by the British Raj also caused a severe decrease in Indian handicraft (and handiloom) sectors of the economy, particularly resulting in a large decrease in demand for employees, goods and services.[24] Although the Raj did not provide capital to the British economy, due to Britain's declining position in the steel making industry in comparison to the US and Germany, the Raj had steel mills set up in India.[25] The Tata Iron and Steel Company (TISCO) first operated in Bihar in 1908 and later became the largest and leading steel producer in India in 1945.[26]
Large amounts of investments by the private and public British investors contributed to a revamped railway system in India, mainly being used for economic growth and military use. This led to the creation of the fourth largest railway system in the world.[27] At first however, the initial use of the railway system was by private British companies. In 1837, the first train used on the railway system for freight transport ran from Red Hills to Chintadripet bridge in Madras.[28] In 1853, the railway began to be used for passenger travel services from Bombay to Thane, eventually expanding throughout most of the Indian subcontinent. During the First World War, the trains were used to transport troops and grain to other countries such as Britain and South Africa, although by the end of the war, the railway system was largely deteriorated.[28]
During the Great Depression, the Indian economy was not significantly impacted and the government was mainly focused on the shipping of gold to Britain.[29] The most significant economic impact on the Indian economy was deflation, which directly impacted the debt of villagers, and overseas trading of jute in Bengal, a key trading element through the 1920s which had significantly decline during the early 1930s. Furthermore, declining prices of jute and other food crops severely impacted large scale farmers in India. In contrast, sugar became a largely traded crop and a successful industry in the early 1930s.[30]
Impact of de-industrialisation in India
The effect of de-industrialisation on the Indian subcontinent is difficult to observe before 1810.[2] The factory driven technologies for the production of cotton appeared between 1780 and 1820, but, India started to lose its dominant position as the exporter of cotton before this period due to low wages in the Indian cotton industry. It also acted as a catalyst in migrating work force from cotton industry to Indian grain industry. The production capacity of the Indian cotton industry started to decline due to the prevailing wage rate. Furthermore, Indian de-industrialisation is also hard to track due to its relatively low share of textile exports in the total textile production.
In India, by 1920, the trade to GDP ratio declined and international trade reshaped the domestic structure of the economy.[31] India became one of the major markets for the British made cotton yarns and cloths and became one of the large suppliers of Grain. The price of cotton decreased by more than a third in the 1900s as compared to the level in 1800.[31] The fall in prices of cotton significantly reduced the production of Indian hand spinning industry which is considered to be the most important specimen of de-industrialisation in India. The industrial revolution of the British cotton industry resulted in the globalization of its colonies as a mean to export excess production. This resulted in the fall the production of cotton in the indigenous industries of colonies due to low prices of British cotton and its derived products.
The large scale de-industrialisation brought far reaching impacts on the economy with loss to traditional economy, which was earlier considered as a blend of agriculture and handicrafts. Spinning and weaving functioned as subsidiary industries in the old economy resulted in differences to the interior equilibrium of the rural market. As an outcome, this led to manually skilled labourers shifting back to agricultural productivity and such overcrowding decreased the efficiency of agriculture sector as well. Land holding fragmentation, excessive cultivation and low-grade and infertile land utilization are the straight impacts of the same. It created a large base of underemployed and disguised rural unemployed. The number of workers engaged in agriculture sector increased from 7.17 crores to 10.02 crores in 1931 and industrial employed workers decreased from 2.11 crores to 1.29 crores during the same period.[32]
The de-industrialisation of India played an important role in the underdevelopment and increasing poverty in the country. The British-led globalisation of Colonial India led to the significant inflow of British cotton which led to falling in the output of the domestically produced cotton due to low prices. Consequently, the de-industrialisation process increased the unemployment of artisan and employees of indigenous cotton industry of India. The unemployed artisans and employees resorted to agriculture and it also contributed to the regression towards agriculture and resulted in the surplus labour of land.[31] The colonial policies associated with the land and taxation undermined ability of the peasant class to control and command the land. It pushed these peasants to take significant debt from non-cultivating moneylenders who charged significantly high interests and aided in the underdevelopment and poverty.[citation needed]
India became independent from the rule of the British Raj on 15 August 1947.[33]
India had undergone socialist reforms from the 1950s to 1990s. Prior to economic liberalisation, India experienced low rates of annual economic growth known as the "Nehruvian Socialist rate of growth" and low rates of per capita income growth.[34]
Photo of Jawaharlal Nehru, the first prime minister of India following the end of the British Raj's rule, and his father Motilal Nehru, an activist for Indian independence and a lawyer
Numerous steel plants were set up in the 1950s by prime minister Nehru under the belief that India had needed to maximise steel production in order for the economy to succeed. This led to the formation of Hindustan Steel Limited (HSL), a government owned company and the establishment of three steel plants throughout the India during the 1950s.[35]
In 1991, the Indian economy underwent economic liberalisation. Through which, India transitioned to a more service and market based sector, with particular emphasis on expanding foreign and private investment within India. Furthermore, in response to deindustrialisation, liberalisation included reductions in import tariffs and taxes, as well as ending many Public Monopolies.[36] Majority of the changes were implemented as a condition for a $500 million loan by the IMF and World Bank to bail out India's government in December 1991.[37]
By the end of the 20th century, India had transitioned towards a free-market economy, through which there was a major decline of state control over India's economy and increased financial liberalisation.[38]
Prior to deindustrialisation, the Indian economy accounted for roughly 25% of the global economy.[39][need quotation to verify] Economic data collected by the OECD shows that growth during the Mughal Empire's reign was more than twice faster than it was around five hundred years prior to the Mughal era.[40] Under the British Raj rule, from 1880 to 1920, the Indian economy's GDP growth rate and population growth rate increased at approximately 1%.[41]
Following deindustrialisation, India's share of the global economy had dropped to approximately 4% in the 1950s.[42]
India's annual growth rate remained approximately around 3.5% prior to economic liberalisation. Per capita income growth had averaged around 1.3% per year.[34]
India's GDP growth rate slowly increased to 7% in the 2018-19 period.[43]
During 2018, India became the fastest emerging economy in the world. India is predicted to return as one of the three largest economies in the world by 2034.[43]
By 2025, it is expected that the Indian working age population will account for at least one quarter of the world economy's working age population.[21]
By 2035, the five largest cities in India are expected to have economies similar in size to middle income economies.[21]
Conclusion of de-industrialisation in India
Amiya Bagchi considers the economic growth rate to have been insufficient to offset the trajectory of de-industrialisation, stating: "Thus the process of de-industrialisation proved to be a process of pure immoderation for the several million persons...[3]"
1 2 3 4 Bagchi, Amiya Kumar (1976). "De‐industrialisation in India in the nineteenth century: Some theoretical implications". The Journal of Development Studies. 12 (2): 135–164. doi:10.1080/00220387608421565. ISSN0022-0388.
↑ Richards, John F., (2012) (1993), "The economy, societal change, and international trade", The Mughal Empire, Cambridge University Press, pp.185–204, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511584060.012, ISBN9780511584060{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
↑ Imperial Gazetteer of India vol. II (1908), The Indian Empire, Historical, Published under the authority of His Majesty's Secretary of State for India in Council, Oxford at the Clarendon Press. Pp. xxxv, 1 map, 573, pp.488–514
↑ Cypher, James M. (24 April 2014). The process of economic development (Fourthed.). London. ISBN9781136168284. OCLC879025667.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
↑ Raychaudhuri, Tapan; Habib, Irfan, eds. (2005). The Cambridge economic history of India (Expandeded.). New Delhi: Orient Longman in association with Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-8125027102. OCLC64451735.
↑ Bahl, Vinay (1994). "The emergence of large-scale steel industry in India under British colonial rule, 1880-1907". The Indian Economic & Social History Review. 31 (4): 413–460. doi:10.1177/001946469403100401. ISSN0019-4646. S2CID144471617.
↑ Kerr, Ian J. (2007). Engines of change: the railroads that made India. Westport, Conn.: Praeger. ISBN9780313046124. OCLC230808683.
1 2 Bhandari, R. R. (2005). Indian railways: glorious 150 years. New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Govt. of India. ISBN978-8123012544. OCLC61513410.
↑ Chandrasekhar, C. P.; Pal, Parthapratim (2006). "Financial Liberalisation in India: An Assessment of Its Nature and Outcomes". Economic and Political Weekly. 41 (11): 975–988. ISSN0012-9976. JSTOR4417962.
↑ Moosvi, Shireen (2015) [First published 1989]. The economy of the Mughal Empire, c.1595: a statistical study (2nded.). New Delhi, India. ISBN978-0-19-908549-1. OCLC933537936.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
↑ Maddison, Angus (2006). The world economy. Paris, France: Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ISBN9789264022621. OCLC85776699.
↑ Tomlinson, Brian Roger (1993). The Economy of Modern India, 1860–1970, New Cambridge history of India. Cambridge University Press. pp.Volume III, 3, Cambridge University Press, p. 109. ISBN978-0-521-36230-6.
↑ Maddison, Angus (2003). The world economy: historical statistics. Paris, France: Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. ISBN978-9264104129. OCLC326529006.
The economy of Bangladesh is a major developing market economy. As the second-largest economy in South Asia, Bangladesh's economy is the 35th largest in the world in nominal terms, and 25th largest by purchasing power parity. Bangladesh is seen by various financial institutions as one of the Next Eleven. It has been transitioning from being a frontier market into an emerging market. Bangladesh is a member of the South Asian Free Trade Area and the World Trade Organization. In fiscal year 2021–2022, Bangladesh registered a GDP growth rate of 7.2% after the global pandemic. Bangladesh is one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
The economy of India has transitioned from a mixed planned economy to a mixed middle-income developing social market economy with notable public sector in strategic sectors. It is the world's fifth-largest economy by nominal GDP and the third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP); on a per capita income basis, India ranked 136th by GDP (nominal) and 125th by GDP (PPP). From independence in 1947 until 1991, successive governments followed the Soviet model and promoted protectionist economic policies, with extensive Sovietization, state intervention, demand-side economics, natural resources, bureaucrat driven enterprises and economic regulation. This is characterised as dirigism, in the form of the Licence Raj. The end of the Cold War and an acute balance of payments crisis in 1991 led to the adoption of a broad economic liberalisation in India and indicative planning. Since the start of the 21st century, annual average GDP growth has been 6% to 7%.
India was one of the richest countries in the world, for about two and a half millennia starting around the end of 1st millennium BC and ending around the beginning of British rule in India.
Certain historical time periods have been named "golden ages", where development flourished, including on the Indian subcontinent.
The Great Divergence or European miracle is the socioeconomic shift in which the Western world overcame pre-modern growth constraints and emerged during the 19th century as the most powerful and wealthy world civilizations, eclipsing previously dominant or comparable civilizations from the Middle East and Asia such as Qing China, Mughal India, the Ottoman Empire, Safavid Iran, and Tokugawa Japan, among others.
Proto-industrialization is the regional development, alongside commercial agriculture, of rural handicraft production for external markets. The term was introduced in the early 1970s by economic historians who argued that such developments in parts of Europe between the 16th and 19th centuries created the social and economic conditions that led to the Industrial Revolution. Later researchers suggested that similar conditions had arisen in other parts of the world.
The role and scale of British imperial policy during the British Raj on India's relative decline in global GDP remains a topic of debate among economists, historians, and politicians. Some commentators argue the effect of British rule was negative, and that Britain engaged in a policy of deindustrialisation in India for the benefit of British exporters which left Indians relatively poorer than before British rule. Others argue that Britain's impact on India was either broadly neutral or positive, and that India's declining share of global GDP was due to other factors, such as new mass production technologies or internal ethnic conflict.
The Great Depression in India was a period of economic depression in the Indian subcontinent, then under British colonial rule. Beginning in 1929 in the United States, the Great Depression soon began to spread to countries around the globe. A global financial crisis, combined with protectionist policies adopted by the colonial government resulted in a rapid increase in the price of commodities in British India. During the period 1929–1937, exports and imports in India fell drastically, crippling seaborne international trade in the region; the Indian railway and agricultural sectors were the most affected by the depression. Discontent from farmers resulted in riots and rebellions against colonial rule, while increasing Indian nationalism led to the Salt Satyagraha of 1930, in which Mahatma Gandhi undertook marches to the sea in order to protest against the British salt tax.
The Economy of India under Company rule describes the economy of those regions that fell under Company rule in India during the years 1757 to 1858. The British East India Company began ruling parts of the Indian subcontinent beginning with the Battle of Plassey, which led to the conquest of Bengal Subah and the founding of the Bengal Presidency, before the Company expanded across most of the subcontinent up until the Indian Rebellion of 1857.
The Mughal Empire was an early modern Indo-Muslim empire in South Asia. At its peak, the empire stretched from the outer fringes of the Indus River Basin in the west, northern Afghanistan in the northwest, and Kashmir in the north, to the highlands of present-day Assam and Bangladesh in the east, and the uplands of the Deccan Plateau in South India.
Since independence in 1947, the economy of Pakistan has emerged as a semi-industrialized one, the on textiles, agriculture, and food production, though recent years have seen a push towards technological diversification. Pakistan's GDP growth has been gradually on the rise since 2012 and the country has made significant improvements in its provision of energy and security. However, decades of corruption and internal political conflict have usually led to low levels of foreign investment and underdevelopment.
The history of cotton can be traced from its domestication, through the important role it played in the history of India, the British Empire, and the United States, to its continuing importance as a crop and commodity.
The textile industry in India, traditionally after agriculture, is the only industry in the country that has generated large-scale employment for both skilled and unskilled labour. The textile industry continues to be the second-largest employment generating sector in India. It offers direct employment to over 35 million people in the country. India is the world's second largest exporter of textiles and clothing, and in the fiscal year 2022, the exports stood at US$ 44.4 billion. According to the Ministry of Textiles, the share of textiles in total exports during April–July 2010 was 11.04%. During 2009–2010, the Indian textile industry was pegged at US$55 billion, 64% of which services domestic demand. In 2010, there were 2,500 textile weaving factories and 4,135 textile finishing factories in all of India. According to AT Kearney’s ‘Retail Apparel Index’, India was ranked as the fourth most promising market for apparel retailers in 2009.
The textile industry is the largest manufacturing industry in Pakistan and nearly 25 million people work in this industry. Pakistan is the eighth largest exporter of textile commodities in Asia. Textile sector contributes 8.5% to the GDP of Pakistan.
Deindustrialisation refers to the process of social and economic change caused by the removal or reduction of industrial activity and employment in a country or region, especially heavy industry or manufacturing industry. Deindustrialisation is common to all mature Western economies, as international trade, social changes, and urbanisation have changed the financial demographics after World War II. Phenomena such as the mechanisation of labour render industrial societies obsolete, and lead to the de-establishment of industrial communities.
Muslin, a Phuti carpus cotton fabric of plain weave, was historically hand woven in the areas of Dhaka and Sonargaon in Bangladesh and exported for many centuries. The region forms the eastern part of the historic region of Bengal. The muslin trade at one time made the Ganges delta and what is now Bangladesh into one of the most prosperous parts of the world. Of all the unique elements that must come together to manufacture muslin, none is as unique as the cotton, the famous "phuti karpas", scientifically known as Gossypium arboreum var. neglecta. Dhaka muslin was immensely popular and sold across the globe for millennia. Muslin from "India" is mentioned in the book Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, authored by an anonymous Egyptian merchant around 2,000 years ago, it was appreciated by the Ancient Greeks and Romans, and the fabled fabric was the pinnacle of European fashion in the 18th and 19th century. Production ceased sometime in the late 19th century, as the Bengali muslin industry could no longer compete against cheaper British-made textiles.
Since precolonial times, Peasant agricultural production has been the predominant economic activity in the landlocked country of Uganda in East Africa. Despite an active trade in ivory and animal hides linking Uganda with the east coast of Africa long before the arrival of Europeans, most Ugandans were subsistence farmers.
The cotton industry was the first and leading industry of Catalan industrialisation which led, by the mid-19th century, to Catalonia becoming the main industrial region of Spain. It is the one Mediterranean exception to the tendency for early industrialisation to be concentrated in northern Europe. The Catalan cotton industry, in common with many European countries and the United States, was the first large-scale application of modern technology and the factory system.
The economy in the Indian Subcontinent during the Mughal Empire era performed just as it did in ancient times, though now it would face the stress of extensive regional tensions. It was described as large and prosperous. India producing about 28% of the world's industrial output up until the 18th century. While at the start of 17th century, the economic expansion within Mughal territories become the largest and surpassed Qing dynasty and Europe, where from Bengal Subah alone, the province statistically has contributed to 12% of Gross domestic product. by 1700s, Mughals had approximately 24 percent share of world's economy. They grew from 22.7% in 1600, which at the end of 16th century, has surpassed China to become the world's largest GDP.
The economy of South Asia comprises 2 billion people living in eight countries. The Indian subcontinent was historically one of the richest regions in the world, comprising 25% of world GDP as recently as 1700, but experienced significant de-industrialisation and a doubling of extreme poverty during the colonial era of the late 18th to mid-20th century. In the post-colonial era, South Asia has grown significantly, with India advancing because of economic liberalisation from the 1980s onwards, and extreme poverty now below 15% in the region. South Asia has been the fastest-growing region of the world since 2014.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
