UPSC Prelims 2009 Q92: Indian Economy – Economic Planning & Five - Year Plans
Consider the following statements regarding Indian Planning :
1. The Second Five - Year Plan emphasised on the establishment of heavy industries.
2. The Third Five - Year Plan introduced the concept of import substitution as a strategy for
industrialisation.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
- (a) 1 only
- (b) 2 only
- (c) Both 1 and 2
- (d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (a) 1 only
Explanation
Checking two claims about India's Five-Year Plans
These statements examine the specific industrial strategies of the Second and Third Five-Year Plans.
| Statement | Verdict | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Second Plan emphasised heavy industries | Correct | The Second Five-Year Plan (1956-61), based on the Mahalanobis model, specifically emphasised establishing heavy industries |
| 2. Third Plan introduced import substitution | Incorrect | Import substitution as a broader industrialization strategy is not specifically credited to the Third Plan as its defining introduction; the Third Plan (1961-66) focused more on agriculture and was disrupted by wars and droughts |
Correcting the Third Plan claim:
| Point | Detail |
|---|---|
| Second Plan (1956-61) | Heavy industries emphasis (Mahalanobis model) — accurate |
| Third Plan (1961-66) | NOT specifically defined by introducing import substitution as its hallmark strategy |
Answer: (a) 1 only.
Why each option is right or wrong
- (a) CORRECT. The Second Plan's heavy-industry emphasis is accurate; the Third Plan's import-substitution claim is not its defining feature.
- (b) Incorrect. Statement 2's import-substitution claim is not specifically credited to the Third Plan as stated, so '2 only' is wrong.
- (c) Incorrect. Statement 2 is inaccurate as framed, so 'both' cannot be correct.
- (d) Incorrect. Statement 1 is accurate, so 'neither' is wrong.
Key point
The Second Five-Year Plan genuinely emphasised heavy industries (Mahalanobis model) — but 'import substitution' is not specifically credited as the Third Plan's defining introduction.
Remember
Second Five-Year Plan: emphasised heavy industries. Third Plan: NOT specifically defined by introducing import substitution.
Common mistakes
- Attributing import substitution specifically and definitively to the Third Plan, when it isn't its hallmark feature.
- Missing the Second Plan's well-documented heavy-industry emphasis under the Mahalanobis strategy.
- Confusing the Third Plan's actual focus (agriculture, disrupted by wars/droughts) with an industrial-strategy milestone.
Exam tip
Second Plan = heavy industries (Mahalanobis model), a well-established fact. Third Plan's defining feature was NOT specifically 'import substitution'.
Sources
- Planning Commission, Government of India — Second Five Year Plan (1956–61)
- Planning Commission, Government of India — Third Five Year Plan (1961–66)