| |
|
WHAT'S NEW
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
COMPARE INDIAN ECONOMY TO
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
TOP STATS
|
![]() |
|
Which countries have the most: |
|
|
![]() |
| More Top Stats » |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
SEARCH ALL
|
FACTS & STATISTICS
Advanced view
|
|
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:
|
|
|
|
|
Aid as % of GDP
|
0.3% |
|
[113rd of 129]
|
|
Business efficiency
|
59.053 |
|
[33rd of 51]
|
|
DEFINITION: Based upon a business efficiency index where '100' represents the highest level of business efficiency. |
|
SOURCE: calculated on the basis of data on ODA from OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), Development Assistance Committee. 2002. DAC Online. Database. Paris.; and data on GDP from World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC |
|
Economic freedom
|
1.5 |
|
[123rd of 156]
|
|
DEFINITION: Index of 'economic freedom', according to the American organisation 'The Heritage Foundation'. It is worth noting that such indices are based on highly culturally contingent factors. This data makes a number of assumptions about 'freedom' and the role of the government that are not accepted by much of the world's population. A broad discussion of The Heritage Foundation's definition and methodology can be found at http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/ChapterPDFs/chapter5.HTML. |
|
SOURCE: IMD International, 2005 |
|
Economic importance
|
2.1 |
|
[25th of 25]
|
|
DEFINITION: Globalpolicy.org |
|
SOURCE: The Heritage Foundation |
|
GDP > PPP
|
$3,362,960,000,000.00 |
|
[4th of 163]
|
|
DEFINITION: Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) in Millions of International Dollars, 2004. |
|
SOURCE: Economic Importance, 1998 (GDP x PC Inc) figures in quadrillion people dollars |
|
GDP growth > annual %
|
9.23 annual %
|
|
[14th of 187]
|
|
DEFINITION: Annual percentage growth rate of GDP at market prices based on constant local currency. Aggregates are based on constant 2000 U.S. dollars. GDP is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. |
View time series
|
|
SOURCE: World Bank. 2005. World Development Indicators 2005. |
|
GDP per capita in 1820
|
$531.00 |
|
[24th of 23]
|
|
SOURCE: World Development Indicators database |
|
GDP per capita in 1900
|
$625.00 |
|
[38th of 39]
|
|
SOURCE: Angus Maddison |
|
GDP per capita in 1950
|
$597.00 |
|
[49th of 52]
|
|
SOURCE: Angus Maddison |
|
GDP per capita in 1973
|
$853.00 |
|
[50th of 52]
|
|
SOURCE: Angus Maddison |
|
GINI index
|
36.8
|
|
[11th of 40]
|
|
DEFINITION: Gini index measures the extent to which the distribution of income (or, in some cases, consumption expenditure) among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Lorenz curve plots the cumulative percentages of total income received against the cumulative number of recipients, starting with the poorest individual or household. The Gini index measures the area between the Lorenz curve and a hypothetical line of absolute equality, expressed as a percentage of the maximum area under the line. Thus a Gini index of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of 100 implies perfect inequality. |
View time series
|
|
SOURCE: Angus Maddison |
|
Gross National Income
|
$477,000,000,000.00 |
|
[12th of 172]
|
|
DEFINITION: GNI, Atlas method (current US$). GNI (formerly GNP) is the sum of value added by all resident producers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not included in the valuation of output plus net receipts of primary income (compensation of employees and prop). |
|
SOURCE: World Development Indicators database |
|
Human Development Index
|
0.602 |
|
[128th of 178]
|
|
DEFINITION: The human development index values in this table were calculated using a consistent methodology and consistent data series. They are not strictly comparable with those in earlier Human Development Reports. |
|
Income category
|
Low income |
|
|
|
DEFINITION: World Bank income categories are used |
|
SOURCE: Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme |
|
Income distribution > Poorest 10%
|
3.5% |
|
[22nd of 114]
|
|
DEFINITION: Share of income or consumption (%). The distribution of income is typically more unequal than the distribution of consumption. |
|
SOURCE: |
|
Income distribution > Richest 10%
|
33.5% |
|
[38th of 114]
|
|
DEFINITION: Share of income or consumption (%). The distribution of income is typically more unequal than the distribution of consumption. |
|
SOURCE: World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC |
|
Population under $1 a day
|
44.2 |
|
[11th of 59]
|
|
DEFINITION: Population below line - proportion receiving less than $1 per day in income (purchasing power parity). Data from most recent available between the period 1983 to 2000. |
|
SOURCE: World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC |
|
Poverty > Share of all poor people
|
41.01 % of world's poor |
|
[1st of 80]
|
|
DEFINITION: The percentage of the world's total poor who live in each nation. 'Poor' here is defined as lving below the global poverty line of US$1 per day. |
|
SOURCE: World Bank 2002b via backone.pdf |
|
Research and development spending
|
0.6% |
|
[39th of 69]
|
|
DEFINITION: Research and development (R&D) expenditures for most recent year available between 1990 and 2000. |
|
SOURCE: Country Responsibilities in Achieving the Millenium Development Goals", April 8 2003, by Janice Poling |
|
Technological achievement
|
0.2 |
|
[59th of 68]
|
DEFINITION: Technology Achievement Index Units: Score |
|
SOURCE: World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC; aggregates calculated for the Human Development Report Office by the World Bank |
... View all Economy stats
SOURCES: calculated on the basis of data on ODA from OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), Development Assistance Committee. 2002. DAC Online. Database. Paris.; and data on GDP from World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC; IMD International, 2005; The Heritage Foundation; Economic Importance, 1998 (GDP x PC Inc) figures in quadrillion people dollars; World Bank. 2005. World Development Indicators 2005.; World Development Indicators database; Angus Maddison; ; Human Development Report 2006, United Nations Development Programme; ; World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC; World Bank 2002b via backone.pdf; Country Responsibilities in Achieving the Millenium Development Goals", April 8 2003, by Janice Poling; World Bank. 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. CD-ROM. Washington, DC; aggregates calculated for the Human Development Report Office by the World Bank; United Nations Development Program. Human Development Report 2001. New York: Oxford University Press,2001, Table A2.1. via ciesin.org
ALTERNATIVE NAMES:
India, Republic of India
Interesting facts on Indian Economy
Related links:
More facts and figures on India
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack 16th October 2011 |
Hey Anon - I think she was using crones, an unit used commonly in India to mean "ten millions." Another term is the lakh, a unit of hundred thousands. |
Anon 30th August 2011 |
#divya
population of countries- in what amount? Billions? |
India 19th August 2011 |
India |
BHAVIKK SHAH 12th April 2011 |
ITS 17.5 % of total world population |
shakti prasad panda 28th January 2011 |
What % of people in india in the world |
ananya 2nd September 2010 |
I wonder how many poor people are there in the world? |
An unknown Indian 12th July 2009 |
Even if India exceeds Ukby their GDP,I doubt whether an average Indian will be as welloff as an average UK citizen,which I very well doubt. |
Adhish Verma 19th May 2009 |
I am a Post graduate student in economics and am currently working on a Research Paper for which I need the following information: Do we have an income classification for India, like Low, middle and high income category? Some reference, publication??
i'll be grateful if someone could help me out with this.
I can receive the information at adhishverma@yahoo.co.in. |
Syed Zahid Ahmad (Mumbai) 3rd August 2008 |
RBI is distracting the Indian economy
Syed Zahid Ahmad
The present trend of recession in US and prevailed uncertainty in petroleum nations had provided an opportunity for India to pull capital resources from US and Gulf countries, but the practical approach of RBI has converted the opportunities into challenges as the liquidity and inflation is certainly not under control of the RBI who is attempting to freeze the liquidity by increasing the interest rate and cost of credits. Interest is a factor for liquidity and credit, but all cares should be taken up while we handle this instrument because if liquidity and credits influences inflation, are also necessary for growth and development. Increased cost of credits not only increases the cost of output, but also creates shortage of supply. This increases the prices levels further up. However the depositor gets higher rate of interest over their deposits and this inflates their purchasing power, thus boosts inflation. FICCI and the corporate sector have already disagreed with RBI recent announcement to increase the rate of interest.
With recent trend of increased capital inflow into India the aggregate deposits by Scheduled Commercial Banks (SCBs) has increased from 80.7% in 2005-06 (Rs. 21,09,049 crores) to 102% (Rs. 31,96,939 crores) of GDP at factor cost by 2007-08. With increased deposits, the bank credits has also increased from Rs. 15,07,077 crores in 2005-06 to Rs. 23,61,914 crores by 2007-08 reflecting 75.6% of GDP at factor cost in 2007-08 as credit against 57.7% in 2005-06. This indeed is a situation, where our economists, financial sector regulators and bankers need to review the policy and practices adopted by RBI as we take interest as a major tool to control liquidity but we hardly evaluate the far reaching consequences of interest in our economic process.
Our real term GDP growth rate (= GDP growth rate at factor cost – rate of inflation) has considerably declined from 5.2% in 2005-06 to 2.9% by 2006-07 and fell down to1.6% by 2007-08. As the interest increases the cost of credit and output, even the GDP value is inflated through interest. Thus the higher GDP growth rate like 9% just reflects 1.6% real term GDP growth rate if inflation rate is 7.4%. The liquidity theory of J. M. Keynes is failed here to guide RBI optimize these opportunities. The practical approach of RBI to curb the rate of inflation by increasing the rate of interest may not control inflation and might lead towards stagflation as the prices are continue to increase along with purchasing power of the depositors, but the expenditure, investment and net GDP growth rate is falling due to costlier credit and interest based deposit schemes.
By increasing the rate of interest, liquidity might be controlled for shorter period, but with increased cost of credit, the GDP value will increase that leads to inflation. Interestingly the interest income to SCBs was Rs. 1,85,384.9 crores in 2005-06 which increased to Rs. 2,37,271.14 crores by 2006-07. It means by 2006-07 total interest income to SCBs was 7.1% of GDP at factor cost. It simply means that the interest income to SCBs has inflated the value of GDP at factor cost by 7.1%.
With increase in rate of interest, the aggregate deposits might increase and SCBs may need to pays more interest over increased deposits. Total Interest expended by SCBs over deposits was Rs. 89,742 crores in 2005-06 which increased to Rs. 1,20,261.08 crores by 2006-07 showing a net annual increase of 34%. This growth is inflationary as it increases the buying capacity of the depositors. By 2006-07, the interest expended over deposits was around 4.20% of GDP at factor cost.
If we add the interest income of SCBs to interest expended over deposits, it stands for around 12.5% of GDP at factor cost and 8.6% of GDP at market prices in 2006-07. Considering the impact of interest on inflation, we may need to add interest income of SCBs through investments / commercial credits with interest expended by SCBs over deposits. This amounts to approximately 9% of GDP at factor cost and 5% of GDP at market prices in the year 2006-07 while annual rate of inflation was 6.7%. It reflects that basically inflation is a result of interest charged on credits expanded by SCBs and interest expended over deposits. The interest charged by SCBs increases the cost of GDP and the price levels, while the interest paid by SCBs over deposits increases the purchasing power of the depositors. Both ways the interest is increasing the price level and causing inflation. Since RBI regulates the banking business in India, by increasing rate of interest it is increasing the inflation and decreasing the real term growth rates.
Further to note that RBI is increasing the rate of interest for over one year to control the inflation which ultimately increasing the cost of GDP showing higher GDP value and increasing inflation instead of controlling it. Our total final consumption expenditure as % of GDP at market prices is already declining from 67.8% in 2005-06 to 65.5% by 2007-08. This decline along with inflation cannot be controlled by increase in interest rate. This economic tendency may leads to stagflation which is more dangerous for economic stability and growth. RBI should review its policies and practices to monitor liquidity, credit and inflation, if we have to combat inflation and attain desirable growth rate.
It is often argued that inflation deteriorates the money value and inflation compensates this devaluation of money value. It should be now clear that inflation itself is a problem caused due to interest and its side effects cannot be removed by interest itself. To control inflation and devaluation of money value, we need stable monetary system with fair fiscal policies. Islamic economic ethics suggests mechanisms for stable and anti inflationary monetary system which should be adopted by RBI to make our monetary system more stable and anti inflationary. Hope the RBI will consider these ethics as measure to combat inflation and stagflation. Islamic Banking principles and practices will not only increase the equity deposits and finances but also promote capitalization and investments. It will help increase employment and business opportunities which are must for inclusive and foster growth of India at a time when world is eying upon Indian economy for making more investments. Otherwise consistent approach of RBI to control inflation through interest rate may let the UPA government face cruel failures in capitalizing the investment and growth opportunities with worst off inflation and stagflation.
Wish all the best for Indian economy, the general Indians, RBI and the UPA government. |
Syed Zahid Ahmad (Mumbai) 2nd August 2008 |
RBI may just ruin the Indian economy
Syed Zahid Ahmad
The present trend of recession in US and prevailed uncertainty in petroleum nations had provided an opportunity for India to pull capital resources from US and Gulf countries, but the practical approach of RBI has converted the opportunities into challenges as the liquidity and inflation is certainly not under control of the RBI who is attempting to freeze the liquidity by increasing the interest rate and cost of credits. Interest is a factor for liquidity and credit, but all cares should be taken up while we handle this instrument because if liquidity and credits influences inflation, are also necessary for growth and development. Increased cost of credits not only increases the cost of output, but also creates shortage of supply. This increases the prices levels further up. However the depositor gets higher rate of interest over their deposits and this inflates their purchasing power, thus boosts inflation. FICCI and the corporate sector have already disagreed with RBI recent announcement to increase the rate of interest.
With recent trend of increased capital inflow into India the aggregate deposits by Scheduled Commercial Banks (SCBs) has increased from 80.7% in 2005-06 (Rs. 21,09,049 crores) to 102% (Rs. 31,96,939 crores) of GDP at factor cost by 2007-08. With increased deposits, the bank credits has also increased from Rs. 15,07,077 crores in 2005-06 to Rs. 23,61,914 crores by 2007-08 reflecting 75.6% of GDP at factor cost in 2007-08 as credit against 57.7% in 2005-06. This indeed is a situation, where our economists, financial sector regulators and bankers need to review the policy and practices adopted by RBI as we take interest as a major tool to control liquidity but we hardly evaluate the far reaching consequences of interest in our economic process.
Our real term GDP growth rate (= GDP growth rate at factor cost – rate of inflation) has considerably declined from 5.2% in 2005-06 to 2.9% by 2006-07 and fell down to1.6% by 2007-08. As the interest increases the cost of credit and output, even the GDP value is inflated through interest. Thus the higher GDP growth rate like 9% just reflects 1.6% real term GDP growth rate if inflation rate is 7.4%. The liquidity theory of J. M. Keynes is failed here to guide RBI optimize these opportunities. The practical approach of RBI to curb the rate of inflation by increasing the rate of interest may not control inflation and might lead towards stagflation as the prices are continue to increase along with purchasing power of the depositors, but the expenditure, investment and net GDP growth rate is falling due to costlier credit and interest based deposit schemes.
By increasing the rate of interest, liquidity might be controlled for shorter period, but with increased cost of credit, the GDP value will increase that leads to inflation. Interestingly the interest income to SCBs was Rs. 1,85,384.9 crores in 2005-06 which increased to Rs. 2,37,271.14 crores by 2006-07. It means by 2006-07 total interest income to SCBs was 7.1% of GDP at factor cost. It simply means that the interest income to SCBs has inflated the value of GDP at factor cost by 7.1%.
With increase in rate of interest, the aggregate deposits might increase and SCBs may need to pays more interest over increased deposits. Total Interest expended by SCBs over deposits was Rs. 89,742 crores in 2005-06 which increased to Rs. 1,20,261.08 crores by 2006-07 showing a net annual increase of 34%. This growth is inflationary as it increases the buying capacity of the depositors. By 2006-07, the interest expended over deposits was around 4.20% of GDP at factor cost.
If we add the interest income of SCBs to interest expended over deposits, it stands for around 12.5% of GDP at factor cost and 8.6% of GDP at market prices in 2006-07. Considering the impact of interest on inflation, we may need to add interest income of SCBs through investments / commercial credits with interest expended by SCBs over deposits. This amounts to approximately 9% of GDP at factor cost and 5% of GDP at market prices in the year 2006-07 while annual rate of inflation was 6.7%. It reflects that basically inflation is a result of interest charged on credits expanded by SCBs and interest expended over deposits. The interest charged by SCBs increases the cost of GDP and the price levels, while the interest paid by SCBs over deposits increases the purchasing power of the depositors. Both ways the interest is increasing the price level and causing inflation. Since RBI regulates the banking business in India, by increasing rate of interest it is increasing the inflation and decreasing the real term growth rates.
Further to note that RBI is increasing the rate of interest for over one year to control the inflation which ultimately increasing the cost of GDP showing higher GDP value and increasing inflation instead of controlling it. Our total final consumption expenditure as % of GDP at market prices is already declining from 67.8% in 2005-06 to 65.5% by 2007-08. This decline along with inflation cannot be controlled by increase in interest rate. This economic tendency may leads to stagflation which is more dangerous for economic stability and growth. The unemployment rates in increasing, the investment rate is also declining; so RBI should review its policies and practices to monitor liquidity, credit and inflation, if we have to combat inflation and attain desirable growth rate.
Islamic economic ethics suggests mechanisms for stable and anti inflationary monetary system which should be adopted by RBI to make our monetary system more stable and anti inflationary. Hope the RBI will consider these ethics as measure to combat inflation and stagflation. Islamic Banking principles and practices will not only increase the equity deposits and finances but also promote capitalization and investments. It will help increase employment and business opportunities which are must for inclusive and foster growth of India at a time where world is eying upon Indian economy for making more investments. Otherwise consistent approach of RBI to control inflation through interest rate may let the UPA government face cruel failures in capitalizing the investment and growth opportunities with worst off inflation and stagflation.
Wish all the best for Indian economy, the general Indians, RBI and the UPA government. |
pankaj 7th November 2005 |
nice and elaborate explaination. |
divya 29th October 2005 |
population of countries in 2003
china 128.69
india 104.97
america 29.03
indonesia 23.49
pakistan 15.07
population of countries in 2050
india 160.10
china 141.76
america 42.00
indonesia 33.62
pakistan 26.78 |
Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
|