Phd literature review sample pdf

© 2017-2018 All Rights Reserved, No part of this document should be modified/used without prior consent
PhD Assistance ™ - Your trusted mentor since 2001 www.phdassistance.com
India: Nungambakkam,Chennai-600034 # +91 8754446690 Info@phdassistance.com
1
Globalization and Productivity Analysis of Indian
Small Scale Industrial Sector

2
Table of Contents
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Section I 3
Section II 8
Section III 14
Section IV 15
References 25

3
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The present chapter is the review of literature pertaining to the study with the purpose of
conveying the knowledge and ideas that have been established on the topic previously. The
intention of this chapter is to formulate the problem statement precisely and develop the basis for
undertaking the research. The review of previous literature is to identify and state the objective in
a clear manner and postulate the premise of the study. The present chapter will be a review of the
number of studies which elucidate the efficiency and productivity levels in the Indian industrial
sector, and in specific the small scale industrial sector of the country. This aids on the
formulation of the suitable methodology for the present study.
Global economic integration, open market policies, rapid growth of technology, the
intense competition between traders and productive companies and the revolution in media
created a positive stir in the Indian economy which led to the emergence of a vast number of
small scale industrial and productive units in India. In this context, the present study will analyse
various empirical studies that have been conducted which are based on the examination of
different growth and performance aspects of the Indian industrial sector, especially small scale
units. The chapters are categorised into three sections. Section I deals with the review of
previous studies pertaining to the measurement of technical efficiency in the Indian
manufacturing sector. Section II analyses the empirical studies relating to the performance and
productivity of the Indian industrial sector. Section III examines economic reformation in India
and sustainability of Indian Small scale industries. Lastly, section IV will focus on reviewing
studies that are relating to the challenges and problems faced by the Indian small scale industries.
Section I
Parameswaran (2002) analysed the performance of the Indian manufacturing sector in the
selected industries in terms of assessing the technical efficiency against the industrial and trade
liberalisation introduced in the year 1991. Time varying firm specific technical efficiency is
measured using the stochastic frontier production function. The results of the study revealed that
the selected industries showed high rate of technical progress during the post reforms period
which is accompanied with the decline in the level of technical efficiency. However, the effect of
economic liberalisation on the technical efficiency of the selected firms varied from one another.
In addition, the study discerned that international trade involvement with respect to import and
export of industrial raw materials had a positive effect on the technical efficiency.
Kumar (2004) evaluated the growth and development of the Indian industrial sector by
measuring the Total factor productivity (TFP) for 15 major states in India for the period 1982-83
to 2000-01. Non- parametric linear programming methods were used to calculate the TFP growth

4
in Indian states. The growth measured through TFP is disintegrated into efficiency and
technological changes and the bias in the technical change is also measured. The results obtained
from the use of non- parametric linear programming methods are used to examine whether
economic liberalisation had positive impacts on the efficiency and productivity in the Indian
economy. Post and pre reforms period analysis was conducted. The findings of the study
revealed significant growth in the Indian economy after liberalisation. The growth is attributed to
the changes in TFP which is governed by the progress in technical aspects. The progress in
technological aspects in the productive sector of the state exhibited a capital bias during the
period of study. The differences in the region wise TFP is evident; however, the difference in the
variation significantly declined in the post –reforms period. In addition, it is also found that the
rate of TFP growth is converging among the different states of the country during the post-
reforms period and those states which were efficient technically during the post-reforms period
had significant growth.
Sivakumar and Patnaik (n.d.) estimated and analysed the efficiencies of the Indian
industrial sector in terms of technical productivity within the period 1973-74 to 1997-98. The
study covered 144 three-digit industries and calculated their efficiency within the specified time
period. The study is aimed to capture the technical efficiency behaviour during the pre and post
economic reforms period. Time-varying stochastic frontier production function in the
transcendental logarithmic form is employed in the study wherein the analysis using the selected
methodology revealed that the efficiency of the selected industries in the period of 1973-74 to
1997-98. The findings of the study revealed that the effects of industry specific inefficiency
hinder the growth of production in the selected industries in achieving the maximised output.
Other factors such as weather, strikes and luck are neglected in the study. The study further
identifies that the technical efficiency of the selected industries is low in post –reforms period
when compared with that of the pre-reforms period.
Madheswara et al. (2007) applied the Stochastic Production Frontier analysis to examine
the Total Factor Productivity (TFP) growth during the period between 1979-80 and 1997-98.
Sector level data within the Indian industrial sector was used for the analysis. The study is
concentrated on the trends of technical efficiency change (TEC) and technical progress (TP).
Stochastic Production Frontier analysis is employed in the study to segregate the two principal
components, technical efficiency change (TEC) and technical progress (TP). This process of
segregation is also used to recognise the growth in productivity which could be either due to
improvement in efficiency or progress in technology. The significance of utilising the frontier
approach as an alternative to the traditional index number approach to measure the growth of
productivity lies within the identification of unobservable and idealized production possibility
frontier with production-unit specific one-sided deviation from the frontier. If a unit of
production functions below the production frontier, then the maximal distance is the measure of

5
its technical efficiency. Henceforth, the Stochastic Production Frontier analysis method captures
the change in efficiency and the change in technologies as the constituting parts of the change in
productivity which is an additional dimension for analysis of policy perspectives. The results of
the study suggest that during the period 1997-98, the total factor productivity growth in a
majority of companies improved when compared with the same during the pre-reforms period,
and in specific 1980-81. In addition, the study findings also revealed that the TFP growth is
steered by progress in technology and technological change adaptation in the companies rather
than change in technical efficiency.
Bhaumik and Kumbhakar (2008) employed the use of plant-level data for the years
between 1989-90 and 2000-2001 in order to assess if the growth that occurred after 1991 resulted
in the use of resources more efficiently. This is inclusive of the assessment for factor inputs
inclusive of capital. The findings of this study are indicative of the fact that the increase in
productivity during the 1990’s was largely attributed to the increase in factor inputs. Other
findings of the study included the alteration of the technical efficiency. This was evidenced with
the decline in the median technical efficiency across all industries except one in the set timeline
as above, however, this change in the technical efficiency offers a partial explanation as to the
change in the added gross value. The analysis of the research points to the aspects of the increase
in return for the factor inputs in these two years which explains the change in gross value
increase across these industries more adequately.
Another study by Mazumdar et al. (2009) evaluated the technical efficiency in order to
measure the competitiveness of pharmaceutical firms in India from 1991-2005. The study
employs a non-parametric approached of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). The analysis
reveals that even though the efficiency outputs were found to be declining, the evidence also
depicted that resources were being made use of adequately in this period. An aspect of the study
that attempted to identify the factors contributory to technical efficiency revealed that the export
expenditure, research and development (R&D) or the use of imported and expensive equipment
did not improve the technical efficiency of the firm.
Mitra et al. (2011) in this regard explores the role of factors such as infrastructure,
information technology, communicative technology and R&D as predictors for technical
efficiency and total factor productivity growth. The study was carried out from 1994-2008 in the
Indian manufacturing industry. In this study advanced estimation techniques are used in order to
counteract the existing limitations such as non-stationary omitted variables, reverse causality and
endogeneity. This was carried out by the application of a fully modified OLS, panel co-
integration and also system GMM. The findings of the study reveal that infrastructure and the IT
with communicative technology are strongly associated with the technical efficiency. Another
interesting finding is that the companies that are more globally acquainted were more likely to

6
have deficiencies in the infrastructure (like transport or chemical companies). The implications
of the findings are that the improvement in the infrastructure and the IT components of the firm
can aid to the enhancement of these sectors further improving the competitive edge for India.
The findings also shed light on the current scenario of infrastructure in India. Lastly, as with the
study above this study too finds for R&D being a weak predictor for technical efficiency, to the
extent that it does not impact the manufacturing industry, but however that it may play a more
vital role in industries that depend on research.
Bhandari et al. (2010) too explored the economic realms of the manufacturing sector in
India and employed the DEA in order to study the economic reforms. This was done to measure
the technical and scale efficiency changes that occurred before and after 1991 as per the reform
initiatives. It was found that the efficiency of the industries declined in the post reform period as
compared to the pre reform period. These implied that the findings are rather significant for the
manufacturing industries but also implies that the changes are varied across different industries.
Another study conducted by Kathuria et al. (2013) in the manufacturing industry in India
post the economic reforms in 1991. This study too employed the use of advanced estimation
techniques such as non-parametric accounting, semi-parametric product function accounting for
endogeneity and parametric stochastic production frontier to measure the total factor productivity
(TFP). The study assessed the same for the periods of 1994-95 and 2005-06. The study findings
reveal that the TFP for both the formal and informal sectors differed vastly over the timeframe.
There was a decline in the TFP in the formal sector between 1994 and 2001. In the case of the
informal sector, all the three methods showed a decline in TFP for 2001-2006. This evidences
that the inconsistencies in the measure for TFP exist, especially between the formal and informal
sectors of the manufacturing industry.
Baliyan et al. (2015) analysed the changes in efficiency and productivity in the 17 major
Indian states known for its considerable growth in the manufacturing sector during the period
1971-82 to 2009-10. State-wise productivity change and efficiency are measured using the Data
Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach which is calculated over the period of 1973-1974 to
2009-2010. The period is divided into pre-liberalisation (1980-1981 to 1989-1990), first phase of
post-liberalisation (1990-1991 to 1999- 2000) and second phase of post-liberalisation (2000-
2001 to 2009-2010). Total Factor Productivity (TFP) change is calculated using the non-
parametric Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach. In addition, the paper evaluates the
performance metrics of the major inputs used in the Indian industrial sector and reveals the
reasons for inefficiency across the different segments. The findings of the study revealed that the
productivity growth and efficiency vary across the different states in the country.

7
Chaudhuri (2016) examined the impacts of economic reformation (liberalisation) on the
technical efficiency and technical progress of the electronics and hardware manufacturing units
in India. Translog stochastic frontier production function is used in the present study to assess the
technical progress and technical efficiency of the industries in the era of economic reformation.
The findings of the study revealed that the electronic manufacturing units in India experience
improvements in the technical progress during the period of 2001-2002 to 2009-2010. However,
the mean level of technical efficiency of the firms had a declining rate during the same period.
The study thereby discerns that a majority of companies failed in spite of the Information
Technology Agreement (ITA) of World Trade Organization (WTO) implementation and such
implementation does not impact the technical efficiency of the electronic manufacturing firms.
Section II
Unel (2003) analysed the trends of productivity in the manufacturing sector of India
during the period of 1980-81 to 1998-1999. The findings of the study revealed that the labour
and total factor productivity (TFP) growth in the Indian industrial sector were significantly
higher till the 1980s; however, the accelerated growth of the TFP is attributed to factor
elasticities and the production function structure. The productivity growth of the manufacturing
as well as the subsectors improved after the liberalisation.
In the same context, Banga and Goldar (2004) assessed the contribution of services to the
productivity and output growth of the Indian industrial sector during the pre and post reforms
period. The KLEMS (capital-labor-energy-materials-services) production function framework is
used to analyse the contribution of the services to the productivity and growth of the Indian
manufacturing sector. The utilised production framework considers services as inputs to the
process of production. The study used panel data of 148 three-digit level industries during the
time frame of 1980-81 to 1997-98 (18 years) and the data is used to estimate the production
function. The results of the analysis revealed that the increasing use of services brought
favourable effects on the productivity and output growth of the Indian manufacturing sector in
the 1990s. It is also to be noted that such favourable could even be due to the economic
liberalisation that was carried out. It is revealed in the study that the percentage of contribution
of services that are input to the growth of the manufacturing sector is just one per cent in the
1980s; however, the rate increased to 25 per cent in the 1990s. A multilateral total factor
productivity index is used to study the effect of services on the productivity of the manufacturing
units. The index is constructed for a majority of 41 industry groups for the period of 1980-81 to
1999-00 and the index is constructed for both with and without services. It is revealed that the
estimate for productivity growth during the period of post-reforms is found to be over-stated
when the services are not considered. The findings of the study indicated that the economic
reforms are responsible for the growth of manufacturing units in the country post liberalisation.

8
Kaur and Kiran (2008) the trends in the partial productivity and the total productivity
factor in the all Indian manufacturing units for 22 industrial groups at the aggregative and
disaggregative levels. Other trends in the output and inputs are also analysed in the study. The
period selected for the study is 1980-81 to 2002- 03 wherein for the purpose of evaluating the
growth of the indian industrial sector, the period for study is divided into two: 1980-81 to 1990-
91 as the pre-reforms period and 1991-92 to 2002-03 as the post reforms period. The study
assesses the changes in the growth of inputs and output and productivity during the pre and post
reforms period. The comparison of results based on the pre and post reforms growth in
productivity in the Indian industrial sector revealed that the post reform era had a slower growth
rate than the pre-reforms period for both aggregative and disaggregative levels.
In the same context, Das and Kalita (2009) computes the productivity growth of the
industrial sector in aggregate levels. The Domar aggregation technique is used to compute the
productivity growth in the Indian manufacturing sector which is the steering factor for the overall
growth of the industrial sector. However, the study states the measurement of the productivity
growth is still an issue due to two reasons. Firstly, a firm’s productivity should be reflected in the
productivity of the lower levels which form the aggregate. Secondly, the aggregate productivity
should highlight the importance of the inter-industry transactions in the analysis of the
productivity growth. Domar weights were used to compute the total factor productivity (TFP)
growth for the ten two-digit industries that are selected for the study during the period of 1980-
2000. A comparison of the estimates on the basis of Domar aggregation technique and traditional
aggregate value added approach revealed that the estimates are half the same obtained using the
traditional aggregate value added method. This further marks significance for the productivity
numbers.
Senapati and Paltasingh (2010) attempted to identify the effects of liberalisation on the
industrial sector of three selected states (Orissa) in India. The period for study is from 1980-81 to
2004-05 and the study period is divided into pre liberalisation (1980-81 to 1989-90) and post
liberalisation period (1991-92 to 2004-05). The study analyses the growth trends in the growth
performance of the Indian industrial units using variables such as gross value added (GVA),
capital stock, labor force, investment level in both pre and post reforms period. Though the
objectives of liberalisation are to transform Indian industrial sector into more efficient and
competitive sector in the global market, the end findings of the study revealed that liberalisation
does not regulate growth in the industrial sector. In addition, the improvements in the
productivity in the industrial units of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh are significant whereas
the same is reverse in the state of Orissa.
Das et al. (2010) analyses the different sources of growth of Indian sectors for the period
of 1980-2004. The INDIA KLEMS project database is selected for the study and the data is

9
acquired for 31 sectors. The study specifically examines the contributions of productivity growth
and the factor accumulation in the selected sectors of the Indian economy. The study revealed
that there has been notable growth in the nation’s economy during the past decades which is
evident from the increasing service sector GDP share. A growth accounting framework is used to
analyse and document the different sources for the economic growth of India. The study assessed
the productivity performance of all the selected sectors during the period 1980-2004 and four
sub-sectors were also selected. The findings of the study revealed that the growth in the TFP is
attributed to the of labour-quantity, quality and capital-ICT and non ICT assets. In addition the
study documents the evidence that the service sector led to the growth of productivity in the
Indian economy. Evidences were also found based on the factor accumulation as the sources of
growth for the Indian economy and its various sectors as well as industries.
Raj (2011) analyses the productivity performance and growth of the Indian
manufacturing sector during the period 1978-79 – 2000-01. The study reveals the evidence of the
increase in the size of the sector with a slowdown during the reformation period. The findings of
the study revealed that the rate of growth in the two-digit industries varies predominantly but the
growth rate variation in the 90s is low. During the reforms period, it is revealed that machinery
manufacturing and textiles industries were rapidly growing industries. The study further
discerned that the total factor productivity and the partial factor productivity factors reflected that
the production in the sector has improved in the period for study. Furthermore, decomposing the
productivity growth into efficiency change and technical change revealed that efficiency change
contributes more to the total factor productivity growth during the period considered for the
study. In addition, the study revealed that wage rate and capital intensity are vital factors for the
augmentation of labour productivity in the sector.
Aggarwal and Sato (2011) examine the impacts of industry dynamics on the productivity
growth of the Indian industrial sector during the period 2000-01 to 2005. Plant level panel data
of 22 manufacturing industries was selected for the study and the empirical analysis of the
industries’ data is performed by decomposition techniques of aggregate productivity growth. The
scope of the analysis is restricted to the data from large sector plants. The results of the analysis
revealed that the in most industries, the emergence of new plants contributed significantly to the
aggregate productivity growth. Though the effect of newly established plants is small, the growth
of these plants is deemed to have substantial impacts on the productivity growth of the industrial
sector. The entry effects of industries embracing low technologies are supported by the
productivity growth of the continuing firms. The entry effects of medium tech industries are
moderate and the productivity growth of continuing firms is assisted by the relocation effects.
Ray (2012) estimated the economic performance of the Indian automobile industry with
respect to capacity utilisation in the industry during the period 1991-92 to 2005-06. In addition,

10
the study also assesses the different factors impacting the capacity utilisation of the Indian
automobile industry. An econometric model is used to determint eh optimal capacity output
which is the minimum point on the short turn total cost curve of the firm. The results of the study
revealed that after the economic liberalisation, the capacity utilisation improved at the rate of 5
per cent per annum. In addition, the results showed that capacity utilisation in firms with high
import penetration and export intensity is low and is indicated by the negative coefficient of
export-intensity variable and import penetration. Furthermore, size and capacity utilisation has a
positive relation which is similar to capital utilisation and market share.
Singh (2012) aspires to analyse the trends of TFP growth in the Indian manufacturing
industries. Both inter –state aggregate and disaggregated levels were considered in the study and
the Malmquist productivity index is used to calculate the annum growth of Total Factor
Productivity (TFP) using the panel dataset of 16 selected major industrial states of the country.
Data is collected for the period of 1979-80 to 2007-08 (29 years). The results of the Malmquist
productivity index revealed that the Indian manufacturing sector is improving with an annual
growth of 9.1 per cent. In addition, the study further revealed that among the 16 states selected
for the study Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa and Gujarat witnessed a double
digit TFP growth. Uttar Pradesh is identified to be growing at the highest rate of 12.8 per cent
growth rate annually which is followed by Madhya Pradesh wherein the growth rate of the state
is 11.8 per cent per annum. The analysis of the different sources of the TFP growth revealed that
both technical progress and technical change contribute to the TFP growth in the Indian
manufacturing sector. In addition, the study also revealed that the efficiency change contributes
more to the TFP growth than technical progress.
Arnold et al. (2016) demonstrated the contribution of the India’s economic policy
reforms in the services. The study utilised the panel data of 4,000 Indian firms for the period
1993-2005. The finding of the study revealed that the reforms in the different sectors such as
telecommunications, banking, insurance and transport had all significantly regulated the
productivity of the Indian manufacturing firms. Reforms in services had positively affected both
local and foreign owned manufacturing units: however, foreign owned firms tend to be strongly
regulated. Services liberalisation impacted in the form of increase in productivity of 11.7 per cent
for the local firms and 13.2 per cent for foreign owned firms. The study further suggests that in
addition to the hindrances affecting the development of the services sector, they also affect the
manufacturing sector adversely.
Mitra and Sharma (2012) in depth analyses the changes in the policies due to economic
liberalisation and the effects of the same in the productivity and efficiency of the Indian
manufacturing firms. The study in specific tested the effects of policy changes on import, export,
R&D and technology over the period of 1994-2008. The results of the analysis revealed that

11
infrastructure is an important factor determining the performance of manufacturing units in
India. In addition, infrastructure is also a determinant for other variables such as communication
technology, transport and energy sectors. Furthermore the results also suggest that the knowledge
transfer through exports is more significant than the same through imports. Since Indian firms
rely on the utilisation of foreign technologies, the study further discerned that the rate of
contribution by the R&D is very little.
Thomas and Narayanan (2012) endeavours to understand the nature of heterogeneity in
productivity and firm level export market participation in the Indian industrial sector. The study
includes the testing of two hypotheses: one is the self-selection of the most productive companies
into the export market and the other is the learning by exporting where manufacturing units
become more productive once they enter the export market. The study utilises firm level data
from the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) for the period of 1990-2009. Levinsohn
and Petrin method is used to estimate the value of Total factor productivity in firm level. The
findings of the study revealed that the productivity rate of exporting companies is higher than the
non-exporting firms in the Indian manufacturing industries. Compared with the magnitude of
productivity of other countries, the study revealed that the magnitude of productivity is not large.
The study further revealed that productivity growth contributes to the sustained participation of
Indian industrial and manufacturing firms in the export market.
Babu and Natarajan (2013) assess the performance of regional manufacturing units in
India with the aid of analysing factors such as total factor productivity and labour. The study is
limited to the scope of considering 15 major Indian states and Malmquist total factor productivity
index is computed using Data Envelopment Analysis approach. The results of the analysis
revealed that labour productivity improved during the reforms period and its TFP growth follows
the same pattern. The study also identifies that the growth in productivity varies across the
selected states and this variation is attributed to the differences in the regional infrastructural
developments. Furthermore, the study recommends that other than improving factors of power
generation, uninterrupted power supply should be available to increase the total factor
productivity. Other factors such as better telecommunication facilities and improved road
connectivity are also recommended to improve the performance of industrially strengthened
states through improved productivity.
Deshmukh and Pyne (2013) examined the productivity of Indian industrial firms and
analysed their capabilities to enter the export market. The study analysed the determinants of
labour productivity at the firm level during the period 1991-2009 and examined whether the
intensity of exports differs between foreign owned and domestic owned companies. Similarly the
intensity of exports is analysed between private and public owned firms. The findings of the
study revealed that local firms/domestic controlled firms are more export-intensive than foreign-

12
owned firms. Similarly private firms are found to be more export intensive than public firms.
Considering the labour productivity determinants at the firm level, raw material intensity and the
size of firm play major role as determinants whereas the status of ownership is not considered
elsewhere.
Bhat (2014) explains categorically that, of late, structural changes have been witnessed in
the Indian manufacturing sector. Nevertheless, the speed of change is not quick enough to
modify the path of development. Manufacturing drives export higher and generates opportunities
for employment and increases business opportunities, but it has occurred sufficiently in the
context of the Indian economy. The contribution towards GDP is around 14 to 16 by the
manufacturing sector, which is not only low bit close to stagnation. Technology utilisation in
manufacturing has not progressed from the basic or intermediate level. R&D expenses are too
low to be able to stimulate industries. Development of manufacturing sector has been one the
decline from early 2007 due to poor investments from the private as well as public sectors. Poor
demand and sluggish growth of GDP seriously affects new investment in consumer and capital
goods industries. Higher interest rates, have added to the aggravating factors of investment
climate. The reduction in demand for manufacture and employment is due to the increased
capital intensity on all manufacturing firms. The route to restore and give and impetus to
manufacturing sector growth calls for an allround development of infrastructure, greater access
to land and acquisition, and the application of advanced technology, education, development of
skills and promoting innovation in cutting edge technologies.
Section III
Subrahmanya, (2005) examined whether sustained growth of Indian small sector relies
post-reformation relies on innovation and technology. The previous research stated that small
scale industries of India are positioned with great importance in the economic structure of the
nation which is evident from their share in the nation’s output, employment and exports. The
cumulative effects of investment regime liberalisation and open market for Foreign Direct
Investments (FDI) in 1991 and formation of World trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995 are
evident from the transformation of the small scale sector. However, fluctuations in the
development of the small scale industrial sector pose a serious threat to the nation’s development
as well as the welfare of the Indian small scale industrial units. The previous study recommends
policy makers to keep the sector competitive and eliminating the factors which reduce the size of
the industry. Furthermore, the Indian SSI sector needs to be technologically competitive so as to
acquire sustainable contribution.
Raju, (2008) examined the past, present and future scenarios of Indian small and medium
scale industries and provided a sustainability framework for development of the sector. The

13
previous research discerned the fact that Indian Small and medium scale industries constitute the
major share of the nation’s economy and have been steering the growth of the nation in terms of
economic developments. The previous research crucially explored the development and growth
in the Indian small scale sector beginning with the economic liberalisation in the year 1991. The
previous study further revealed that technological advancements and innovations in in-house
environment of Indian small scale sector can boost productivity and tends to improve sustainable
development of the sector. Furthermore, technology could be the only solution to proceed
consistently and consciously. The previous study further revealed that a proper financial
infrastructure needs to be established wherein for Indian small scale sector, adequate credit
inflows should be facilitated.
Mishra, (2012) examined the contribution of Indian small and medium scale industries
and assessed the need for sustained development in the sector. The paper titled “Small Scale
Industries: Striving and Thriving in the Era of Globalization” claims that the Indian Small and
medium scale industrial sector contributes a significant part to the Indian economy in terms of
output, employment and the nation’s export rate. The previous study revealed that more than 45
per cent of the entire manufacturing output of the nation is accounted by the Small and medium
scale industries and 40 per cent of the total exports of the nation is contributed by this sector.
Furthermore, the study revealed that the sector is predicted to employ more than 65 million
persons in the year 2012. However, the sustainable growth of Indian small and medium scale
industries is questioned wherein the previous researcher recommends the government to take
active roles in improving the sector through creation of awareness, support through government
programs and funds. Such an approach would aid Indian small and medium scale industries to
sustain in the era of economic liberalisation.
Rakesh, (2014) conducted a PEST analysis to examine the different factors affecting
sustainability of Indian SSIs. The previous study discerned that Indian small and medium scale
enterprises require changes in their technologies, practices wherein there is a dire need to
identify the factors that could drive towards sustainment. It is further claimed that for Indian
small and medium scale industries, sustainability is complicated unless there is cost reduction
and control. The previous study identified two different dimensions- external and internal.
Internal factors such as technological changes could be established so as to improve
sustainability. However, external factors could not be changed and hence require adaptation.
Section IV
Garg (1996) carried out in depth studies on the performance of large industries, modern
Small scale industries and traditional industries. The assessment and review in the study relies on
the data disseminated by the ASI; Development Commissioner. It was observed that smaller SSIs

14
were expanding in terms of numbers as well as number of employees, the scale of investment
and the quantum of total output. SSIs functioning in the factory segment (at par with larger SSIs)
have however, not projected any growth in the total units of factories and number of employees;
though there has been fast paced accumulation of capital. There is a widespread opinion that
some of the Government policies are making capital available cheaper with respect to labour and
there has been an inclination to replace capital for manpower in the large scale units and SSIs in
the factory sector. When it comes to size, the larger units among the SSIs are growing bigger
whereas the smaller units are shrinking and becoming smaller. With regard to the efficiency of
the units, while there is higher labour productivity in larger SSIs, smaller SSIs units utilise their
reduced capital better and are also observed to be more labour intensive. The traditional
industries have performed well in terms of absorption of labour and their capability to earn forex.
This study analyses if the current policies of the Government to establish new units be
encouraged, or whether the policies of the Government need to be focused towards promoting
the growth of the existing SSIs. It is also necessary to review the growth of Small Scale
Industries in the context of a liberal economy and understand what types of technology - flexible
specialisation or mass production-needs to be taken up to spur growth and to drive up generation
of employment.
Sonia and Kansal (2009) studied and evaluated the performance of SSIs, both prior and
post liberalization and compared them with the average annual rates of growth, to gauge the
impact of Globalization on the actual performance of SSIs. The study is for the period between
1973- 2007 and based on secondary information. In this study, efforts have been made to assess
the effect of globalization on the growth of SSIs. The comparison of growth patterns of the key
parameters between the Pre- and Post – Globalization periods reveals that “globalization”
actually had a negative effect on the development of SSIs that were considered in terms of
numbers of units, the volume of production, the number of employees and export data. A steep
drop in the rate of growth of number of units and in employment generation in the post
liberalisation period is a matter of serious concern for the policy-makers and planners of policy
reforms. To sum up, we can establish conclusively that the recent pattern of growth of the SSI
sector was a display of the reliance of the Indian economy on globalization and liberalisation,
which had on earlier occassions failed to positively impact the growth of SSIs in India.
Subrahmanya (2005) carried out extensive studies on the performance, potential and
prospects of SSIs in India in the era of globalisation. SSIs have strategic importance in the Indian
economy mainly due to its significant contribution to generation of employment, production and
increased exports. But, from the year 1991, SSIs in India have been in a highly competitive
environment mainly due to globalisation, domestic liberalisation of the economy and dilution of
specific protective measures for the sector. This study investigates the consequences of
globalisation and domesticv economic liberalisation for SSIs and examines its growth

15
performance by quantifying them in terms of units, number of employees, the volume of output
and exports. The study attempted to present solutions to these questions. In this study, the official
definition of small enterprise and their role as laid down from time to time by the Government of
India under the Industries Development and Regulation (IDR) Act, 1951 are followed. Presently,
small-scale enterprises are categorised as those that have original investment in plant and
machinery, and if they are held on ownership terms or on lease,’ hire purchase basis, below Rs.
One Crore. The study concludes with recommendations on policies to maintain the sustenance
and to spur competitive growth of SSIs in India.
Garg (2013) reviewed the Performance & Challenges of Small Scale Industries in India.
This study analysed the existing microeconomic evidence to check if SMEs promoted growth
and reduced poverty. During the present economic meltdown the SME sector had been affected
very badly primarily due to the hike in interest rates and the financial crunch. The small size and
capacity of the SMEs combined with their lack of knowledge have created many obstacles to
their growth and development such as under-utilization of capacity, insufficient and un-timely
credit flows, inability to adapt technology upgradation, inadequate raw-material procurement,
inability to market finished goods, and ineffective monitoring and feedback mechanism. The
problem which continues to be obstacles for the development of the sector is the inability to raise
funds in time. The importance of SMEs in the nation is significant and irreplaceable. This is
entirely because of the number of burgeoning units in the country. This sector, contributes
greatly to the development and employment sector. This sector discharges the task of providing
employment to minorities, the backward classes and to women. This sector faces problems on a
daily basis, such as shortage of electricity, and lack of basic infrastructure along with the market
related problems. To effectively solve these problems and promote and develop the SME sector,
major concerted efforts have been undertaken in the eleventh plan. However the efforts are
insufficient. For the all round development of rural and farming group, separate departments
need to be formed. Likewise, in the development of industrial ministry for urban Micro and
Small and Medium Industries separate and targeted efforts need to be initiated. SMEs have
always been a represention of the model of socio-economic policies of the Government of India
which has stressed on the responsible use of foreign exchange for importing capital goods and
inputs; manpower intensive mode of production; for employment generation; no focus or
diffusion of economic power in the hands of a few (similar to large houses); frowning and
rejecting practices of production and marketing that can be called monopolistic; and lastly,
effective and significant contribution to the foreign exchange earnings and reserves of the nation
through operations that rely on low import operations. SMEs are the de facto growth engine of
the economy and help to maintain and support sustain other sectors such as allied services.
Kanagarathinam and Sukumar (2013) carried out in-depth studies of the challenges in
the marketing Strategies in Small Scale Industries. This empirical study encompasses the socio-

16
economic conditions, marketing strategies of SSIs and highlights the marketing problems faced
by SSIs. The primary aim of this study is to share knowhow with the SSIs regarding the blind
spots and grey areas in the marketing of their products. Data was collected collated from both
primary and secondary sources. The sample size was around 50 small industrial units selected
from among 1900 registered Industrial Units to train the spotlight on the performance of the
entrepreneurs. Of the selected sample size, a two stage stratified simple random sampling
technique was adopted to conduct the test. In the first step the industries were classified under 9
segments based on the nature of the products viz, Agro based, Textiles, Chemicals, rubber and
plastics, Engineering, food and food processing, metallic, paper and wood building material,
industrial units etc. In the second part 50 per cent of the selected units that were in existence for
three years were selected for focused and intensive study. The sample units that were selected
were from all the strata, clubbed together and equally allocated for each strata. The analysis
observed that more than 50 per cent of the sample units did not have any dedicated marketing
personnel, and the marketing activity was being taken care of personally by the entrepreneur
himself. But, the statistics reveal that less than 50 per cent of the sample units had some kind of a
marketing setup with a small marketing section, around 60 per cent of them have reported to the
personal selling method, 28 per cent of sample units have accorded second and third place
priority in terms of importance towards marketing function. Around 42 per cent of the sample
units did devise an annual marketing plan, while 10 per cent opted for plans for one full year to
sell their products. Around 54 % of the sample units had sufficient marketing opportunities for
their products and 80 per cent of them have not made any efforts to update regarding the cost
effectiveness of their marketing strategy. 62 per cent of the sample size of the SSIs faces stiff
competition and a similar percentage of sample units sell their products to customers from
industrial sector, whereas 56 per cent of small units offload their products in the national market.
Around 74 per cent of the sampled units do not conduct any kind of market survey. Similarly, an
equal number of the sample units have attained the goal of customer satisfaction. 71.05 per cent
of the sample units have encountered serious issues regarding quality of their products. 60.53 per
cent of the units have had to contend with moderate problems of pricing their products. 42.11 per
cent of the sample units have had to bear the brunt of customers’ for not sticking to the time
schedules and introduction of their products into the markets. 50 per cent of the sample units
have faced moderate problems of incorrect segregation. 55.26 per cent of sample units have
faced serious issues of unreasonably high cost of marketing personnel. 73.68 per cent of the
sample units have undergone unpleasant experiences during distribution of their products. 60.53
per cent of the sample units have had to face issues during sales promotion. 89.47 per cent of the
sample units have had to contend with their competitors. 65.79 per cent of the sample units in the
district have experienced similar problems to a moderate extent. A significantly high percentage
(89.47) of the sample units faced serious issues created by the competition. Other minor issues
such lack of sufficient knowledge regarding product design, packaging, branding, Indian

17
Standard Institution (ISI) mark, and shortage of packaging materials etc., were encountered by
65.79 per cent of the small units to a moderate extent.
Pandey (2013) examined the trends, opportunities & challenges in small scale and cottage
INDUSTRIES in India with special focus on the state of Uttar Pradesh. The study postulates the
issues and prospects of SSIs and cottage industries in the state of Uttar Pradesh, where there are
no existing large and medium scale industries and whose development is directly related to the
various initiatives, programmes and policies designed to alleviate poverty, unemployment and
backwardness of the rural people. Data, both primary and secondary were used in the study. The
information thus collected and collated from the primary and the secondary sources has been
edited, classified and sorted in a logical order. During this process, errors and omissions were
detected and the same were corrected after due validation. Tabular analysis was done in two
manners - manually as well as digitally with the “Statistical Package for Social Scientists”
(SPSS) and SYSTAT software. The findings proved that after recognizing the important role that
SSIs play in the national economy, the central as well as the state governments have taken
initiatives to develop, promote and nurture their growth. Many of these programs have been
effective: whereas most of the problems of SSI still continue to affect the smooth functioning
and growth of the sector. Small scale and cottage industries are witnessing an upheaval from a
host of problems; some are similar to the whole gamut of industries whereas others are
particularly relevant only to a specific group or category of industries located in certain rural and
backward area. A reorientation or realignment of the attitude of the citizens of the particular state
in general, and the educated aspiring youth, and the capitalist class in particular is an urgent
requirement that needs to be undertaken to pave the way for reforms and industrialization in the
state.
Vaijayanti (2013) delved further and studied extensively the problems faced by the small
scale sector in India. The study revealed that in terms of value, the SSI sector contributed around
40 per cent market share of the value added in the manufacturing sector and around one third of
the total national export share. In order to infuse vitality and growth in the small scale sector, a
separate policy statement has been released for the benefit of small, tiny & village enterprises on
6th August 1991. Numerous problems have been tagged with marketing in Small Scale Sector.
For this purpose the researcher has categorised the problems into six different sets viz; 1. Market
Structure Problems 2. Logistic Problems 3. Managerial Problems 4. Economic Problems 5.
Communication Problems 6. Socio-psychological Problems. A majority of these problems arose
because of traditional mind set or shortfall in infrastructural requirements. The major problem is
the socio-economic conditions and the socio-psychological setups. Various issues faced by the
individual unit owners of Small Scale industries have been ascribed different weightage as per
different points of view. Concerted efforts need be made to be able to come out with a solution
that's acceptable to all.

18
Chandraiah and Vani (2014) closely examined the Prospects and Problems of MSMEs
sector in India. This study carried out an in-depth analysis of the definition of MSMEs, their role
and the performance of MSMEs in the context of the Indian economy, Government policies
towards MSMEs and issues of MSMEs. The relevant secondary data was compiled from the
official publication of “Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, journals, Government
of India” published by the Reserve Bank of India and the Handbook of Statistics on Indian
Economy. The general performance and contribution of SSIs to the Indian economy is explained
in terms of the total growth in terms of such units, the number of employees, the output
production and quantum of exports. The MSMEs Development Act of 2006 is the most
important of the changes in policy effected recently. The formulation and implementation of
policies and initiatives or projects or schemes or programmes in the MSME sector is executed by
the Ministry with the inputs and assistance of organisations that are both associated and
autonomous. The development of SSIs can be assessed, based on the growth rates of units, the
number of employees, the quantum of output and exports of SSIs in 2013 vis a vis that of 1990s.
At the same time the MSMEs sector encountered Key Challenges such as Lack of sufficient and
timely credit, steep or High rate of credit, difficult collateral requirements, Limited access to
equity capital, inability to Procure raw materials at a competitive cost, storage Problems,
designing, packaging and display of the product, Lack of access to global markets, poor and
insufficient infrastructure facilities such as power, water, roads, abysmally Low technology
levels, Lack of skilled manpower for manufacturing, services, marketing, etc. Though the
numerous challenges that had to be contended with, the MSME sector has shown remarkable
innovation, versatility, and Resilience to be able to survive and come out unscathed from the
recent economic downturn and recession. The small scale sector has developed and grown
admirably and rapidly over the years. The era of liberalization and the growth of the MSMEs
sector comprise an important segment of Indian economy. MSMEs are a very crucial segment in
the Indian industrial sector and would be an ongoing process in the Indian Economy in the near
future. A beneficial aspect of economic growth in India is due to the remarkable development of
modern MSMEs.
Modi (2014) analysed the issues and prospects of SSIs in India. Small Scale Industries
exist in all nations. A developing nation like India provides a special place for the small scale
sector in the industrial structure. Hence, the Government of India has provided this sector an
important position in the framework of Indian economic planning for reasons that are both
ideological as well as economic. Due to this, small sectors have clocked an impressive growth
rate in the total numbers of units and the volume of production during the last sixty year since
independence. Despite possessing huge potentialities, the Indian SSIs could not progress as
satisfactorily as desired, since these industries have many drawbacks. Hence, this research study
is an attempt to identify the problems faced by the Indian SSIs and to understand the prospects of
these SSIs.

19
Patil and Chaudhar (2014) studied the issues of Small Scale Industries in India by
collecting and collating secondary data from the website of the Ministry of Small and Medium
Enterprises, from the Government of India and from other published material. The review of
prospects and issues of MSMEs have shown that the total number of SSIs have increased from
105.21 lakhs in 2001- 02 to a staggering 298.08 lakhs in 2009-10. They have grown by three
times within a span of one decade. But, the growth was consistent till 2005-06 and in 2006-07
the growth rate shot very high (i.e. 111.18 per cent) but subsequently, the growth rate has been
only around 4.5 per cent till the year 2009-10 when compared to the same period in the
respective previous years. Though the SSIs have made commendable contribution to the nation's
economy, the SSI sector does not receive the necessary support from the concerned Government
Departments, Banking Institutions, Financial Institutions and Corporates, which has become a
handicap while competing in National and International Markets. Varied issues such as acute
shortage of skilled manpower, poor and insufficient credit assistance, poor and irregular supply
of raw materials and lack of proper infrastructure have attributed to the decline in progress of
SSIs. To empower the SSIs to regain their rightful place as the growth engine of the economy of
India, it is necessary that support is extended to the MSMEs that they are educated and
empowered to be able to optimise utilization of resources, both human and economic, to achieve
the elusive success. The SSIs need to be informed, educated and updated of the latest
developments occurring globally and helped in acquiring the necessary skills to be abreast of the
global developments.
Ziniya (2014) studied the complex nature of SSIs in India. Small scale industries perform
an important role in a developing nation's economy. If the population of India is considered then
it can be inferred that this sector has great potential in India. Globally, the unorganized
industrialized sector has been recognized as Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) whereas in
India it has been identified as SSI. The SSIs in India have become an engine of development for
the financial system, making significant contributions towards increase in the GDP, employees
and volume of exports. This sector has constantly contributed to India’s economic progress but
SSIs cannot make contributions exactly in comparison to other industries because of the nature
of specific difficulties. There are some issues which are a reason for the prevention of growth of
SSIs in India. The primary focus of this research study is to identify the major issues and
problems faced by SSIs.
Aruna (2015) analysed the problems faced by MSMEs – A Special Reference to Small
Entrepreneurs in Visakhapatnam. Small business establishment often face numerous problems
that are actually related to their size of operations. A regular reason for cash and liquidity crunch
is undercapitalization. This is more often than not, due to poor planning rather than fiduciary
reasons. It is an accepted rule of thumb that the entrepreneur should be able to raise some amount
of money that is at least equal to the projected revenue expected during the very first year of

20
business apart from the approximate expected expenses or overheads. MSMEs in India face a
plethora of problems - lack of sufficient and on-time finance from banks or financial institutions,
lack of suitable advanced technology, poor marketing due to inadequate resources and non-
availability of adequately trained and skilled manpower. These business houses are generally
confronted with issues that are different from that of the larger companies and multi-national
corporations. The problems include, but are not limited to the following: lack of it support, lack
of it literacy, lack of formal procedure and discipline, uneven it awareness and management
skills, lack of financial resources, lack of human resources, raw material problems, production
problems, etc. Proven statistics have shown that obstacles like financial constraints and issues
that are related to electricity, power; raw material procurement needs to be even more effectively
handled by the government. Additionally, the data that is collected and collated has revealed
statistics that the general globalised business environment of India has always been favourable
on an average level towards the growth of micro and small scale industries.
Nagaraju (2015) studied the growing opportunities and challenges for SSIs in the
emerging Indian market. SSIs occupy an important position in the Indian economy, contributing
to more than half of the total industrial production in terms of value addition. The sector
accounts for around 33% of the total export revenues earned and have on its payrolls the largest
manpower next to the agriculture sector. In India's present liberalized scenario, the growth and
survival of small-scale industry (SSI) depends to great extent on its ability to improvise,
innovate, improve its operational efficiency and increase the productivity. The role played by
small-scale industries in the financial growth of India in the recent past is analysed in depth in
this study. Various parameters influencing the growth and development of SSIs and the problems
encountered by important sector of Indian economy is thoroughly examined. The contribution of
SSIs in terms of increased employment, higher production, higher volumes of export promotion
and numerous other economic indicators are discussed. Conclusions that have been arrived at,
based on the examination of the data indicate that the numerous policy initiatives implemented
by the Government of India from independence have contributed to the growth of this sector. A
few of the policies of the Government of India may, unfortunately, not be very useful in
contributing to the efficiency of units in this sector because many non-viable units have been
added to earlier unsuccessful entities.
Siddiqui (2015) examined the problems encountered in the operation of Micro Small and
Medium Enterprises in India. MSMEs perform a crucial role in the Indian economy by way of
contributing around 60 per cent of the total number of people employed in export sector, around
40 per cent of GDP and more than half of total exports. Though there has been a significant
increase in the number of MSMEs many challenges were faced by MSMEs during their growth.
This research study looks at the specific challenges that were encountered by the MSME sector.
To carry out this study, stratified random sampling was utilised, the number of participating

21
respondent MSMEs were 112, and the data was collated through structured questionnaires. The
data was later analysed through ANOVA and data represented by tables. It was observed that the
major problems faced by the MSMEs are: marketing their products and acute shortage of
working capital.
References
Aggarwal, A. & Sato, T. (2011). Firm Dynamics and Productivity Growth in Indian Manufacturing:
Evidence from Plant Level Panel Dataset. [Online]. Nada, Kobe. Available from:
http://www.rieb.kobe-u.ac.jp/academic/ra/dp/English/DP2011-07.pdf.
Arnold, J.M., Javorcik, B., Lipscomb, M. & Mattoo, A. (2016). Services Reform and Manufacturing
Performance: Evidence from India. [Online]. Available from:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~econ0247/India.pdf.
Aruna, N. (2015). Problems Faced By Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises – A Special Reference
to Small Entrepreneurs in Visakhapatnam. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. [Online].
17 (4). pp. 43–49. Available from: http://iosrjournals.org/iosr-jbm/papers/Vol17-issue4/Version-
5/F017454349.pdf.
Babu, S.M. & Natarajan, R.R. (2013). Growth and spread of manufacturing productivity across
regions in India. SpringerPlus. [Online]. 2 (1). pp. 53. Available from:
http://springerplus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/2193-1801-2-53.
Baliyan, S.K., Baliyan, K. & Ghosh, P. (2015). Technical Efficiency and Productivity Change in The
Indian Manufacturing Industries: A State wise Analysis. Journal of Regional Development and
Planning. 4 (2). pp. 45–60.
Banga, R. & Goldar, B. (2004). Contribution of Services to Output Growth and Productivity in Indian
Manufacturing: Pre and Post Reforms. ICRIER Working Paper. [Online]. New Delhi. Available
from: http://www.icrier.org/pdf/wp139.pdf.
Bhandari, A.K., Bhattacharya, M., Chen, J.-R., Pradeep, V. & Yang, C.-H. (2010). Productivity,
Technical Progress And Scale Efficiency In Indian Manufacturing: New Evidence Using Non-
Parametric Approach. Discussion Paper. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/units/dru/papers/working-papers-
10/1004productivitybhandaribhattacharya.pdf.
Bhat, T.P. (2014). Structural Changes in the Manufacturing Sector and Growth Prospect. ISID.
[Online]. New Delhi. Available from: http://isid.org.in/pdf/WP173.pdf.

22
Bhaumik, S.K. & Kumbhakar, S.C. (2008). Impact of Reforms on Plant-Level Productivity and
Technical Efficiency: Evidence from the Indian Manufacturing Sector. Discussion Paper.
[Online]. Germany. Available from: http://www.sumonbhaumik.net/iza_dp3347.pdf.
Chandraiah, M. & Vani, R. (2014). The Prospects and Problems of MSMEs sector in India an
Analytical study. International Journal of Business and Management Inventio. [Online]. 3 (8).
pp. 27–40. Available from: http://www.ijbmi.org/papers/Vol(3)8/D038027040.pdf.
Chaudhuri, D.D. (2016). Impact of Economic Liberalization on Technical Efficiency of Firms:
Evidence from India’s Electronics Industry. Theoretical Economics Letters. [Online]. 6 (3). pp.
549–560. Available from:
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?DOI=10.4236/tel.2016.63061.
Das, D.K., Erumban, A.A., Aggarwal, S. & Wadhwa, D. (2010). Total Factor Productivity Growth in
India in the Reform Period: A Disaggregated Sectoral Analysis. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.worldklems.net/conferences/worldklems2010/worldklems2010_das_wadhwa.pdf.
Das, D.K. & Kalita, G. (2009). Aggregate Productivity Growth in Indian Manufacturing: An
Application of Domar Aggregation. [Online]. Available from:
http://icrier.org/pdf/WorkingPaper239.pdf.
Deshmukh, J. & Pyne, P.K. (2013). Labour productivity and export performance: Firm-level evidence
from Indian manufacturing industries since 1991. ARTNeT. [Online]. Bangkok. Available from:
http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/AWP No. 126.pdf.
Garg, A.K. (2013). Performance & Challenges of Small Scale Industries in India. Indian Journal of
Research. [Online]. 2 (11). pp. 209–210. Available from:
http://www.worldwidejournals.com/paripex/file.php?val=November_2013_1384850874_52d50_
66.pdf.
Garg, C.C. (1996). Growth of Small Scale Industries In India Some Policy Issues. [Online]. Available
from: http://nipfp.org.in/media/medialibrary/2013/04/wp_1996_10.pdf.
K. D. Raju (2008). Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) in India: Past, Present and Future.
Kanagarathinam, M. & Sukumar, A. (2013). A Study on Marketing Strategies in Small Scale
Industries. A Journal of Nehru Arts and Science College. [Online]. 1. pp. 1–4. Available from:
http://nehrucolleges.net/images/pdf/journal_dec13_1.pdf.

23
Kathuria, V., Raj, R.S.N. & Sen, K. (2013). Productivity Measurement in Indian Manufacturing: A
Comparison of Alternative Methods. Journal of Quantitative Economics. [Online]. 11 (1&2).
Available from: http://www.jqe.co.in/journals/jqe_v11_148-179_vinish_kathuria.pdf.
Kaur, M. & Kiran, R. (2008). Indian Manufacturing Sector: Growth and Productivity under the New
Policy Regime. International Review of Business Research Papers. [Online]. 4 (2). pp. 136–150.
Available from: http://www.irbrp.com/static/documents/March/2008/1423377682.pdf.
Kumar, S. (2004). A Decomposition of Total Factor Productivity Growth : A Regional Analysis of
Indian Industrial Manufacturing Growth. [Online]. New Delhi. Available from:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.380.7202&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
Madheswara, S., Rath, B.N. & Liao, H. (2007). Productivity Growth of Indian Manufacturing Sector:
Panel Estimation of Stochastic Production Frontier and Technical Inefficiency. The Journal of
Developing Areas. [Online]. 40 (2). pp. 35–50. Available from:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4193029?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.
Mazumdar, M., Rajeev, M. & Ray, S.C. (2009). Output and Input Efficiency of Manufacturing Firms
in India: A Case of the Indian Pharmaceutical Sector. [Online]. Bangalor. Available from:
http://www.isec.ac.in/WP 219 - Mainak Mazumdar.pdf.
Mishra, S. (2012). Small Scale Industries: Striving and Thriving in the Era of Globalization.
International Journal of Enterprise Computing and Business Systems. 2 (2). pp. 1–17.
Mitra, A. & Sharma, C. (2012). Are reforms productive? Explaining productivity and efficiency in the
Indian manufacturing. [Online]. Available from: http://cerdi.org/uploads/ed/2012/2012.33.pdf.
Mitra, A., Sharma, C. & Veganzones, M.-A. (2011). Total Factor Productivity and Technical
Efficiency of Indian Manufacturing: The Role of Infrastructure and Information &
Communication Technology. [Online]. Available from: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-
00597656/.
Modi, S. (2014). Problems and Prospects of Indian Small Scale Industries. Research Journal.
[Online]. 1 (3). pp. 201–206. Available from: http://www.business-
dimensions.org/dnload/Satish-Modi/BDV01I03P0201.pdf.
Nagaraju, N. (2015). Emerging Opportunities and Challenges For Small Scale Industries in an
Emerging Indian Economy. International Journal of Scientific Research. 4 (6). pp. 546–548.
Pandey, V. (2013). Trends, Opportunities and Challenges in Small Scale and Cottage Industries in
Uttar Pradesh. Asian Journal of Technology & Management Research. [Online]. 3 (2). Available

24
from: http://www.ajtmr.com/papers/vol3issue2/TREND-OPPORTUNITIES-AND-
CHALLENGES.pdf.
Parameswaran, M. (2002). Economic Reforms and Technical Efficiency: Firm Level Evidence From
Selected Industries in India. White Paper. New Delhi.
Patil, S. & Chaudhar, P.. (2014). Problems of Small Scale Industries in India. International Journal of
Engineering and Management Research. [Online]. 4 (2). pp. 20–21. Available from:
http://www.ijemr.net/DOC/ProblemsOfSmallScaleIndustriesInIndia(19-21)57c54866-ea0f-4451-
be7a-29fc86861280.pdf.
Raj, R. (2011). Structure, Employment and Productivity Growth in the Indian Unorganized
Manufacturing Sector: An Industry Level Analysis. CMDR Monograph Series. [Online].
Available from: http://cmdr.ac.in/editor_v51/assets/mono-50.pdf.
Rakesh, C. (2014). PEST Analysis for Micro Small Medium Enterprises Sustainability. Journal of
Management and Commerce. 1 (1). pp. 18–22.
Ray, S. (2012). Economic Performance of Indian Automobile Industry: An Econometric Appraisal.
Business Intelligence Journal. 5 (1). pp. 151–162.
Senapati, A.K. & Paltasingh, K.R. (2010). Trade Policy Orientation and Productivity Growth in the
manufacturing sector: A Comparative study of three states. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.mse.ac.in/Frontier/k11 asis senapati A.pdf.
Siddiqui, M.A. (2015). Operational Problems of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises. International
Journal in Management and Social Science. 3 (4). pp. 606–616.
Singh, F.P. (2012). Economic Reforms and Productivity Growth in Indian Manufacturing Sector: An
Interstate Analysis. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management
Research. [Online]. 1 (2). pp. 1–22. Available from:
http://indianresearchjournals.com/pdf/IJMFSMR/2012/December/1.pdf.
Sivakumar, P. & Patnaik, U.S. (n.d.). Economic Reforms and Technical Efficiency Performance in
Indian Manufacturing Sector. [Online]. Available from:
https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/2193.pdf.
Sonia & Kansal, R. (2009). Globalization and Its Impact on Small Scale Industries in India. PCMA
Journal of Business. [Online]. 1 (2). pp. 135–146. Available from:
http://www.publishingindia.com/uploads/samplearticles/pcma-sample-article.pdf.

25
Subrahmanya, B. (2005a). SMALL SCALE INDUSTRY IN INDIA UNDER GLOBALISATION:
DOES SOLACE LIE IN TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION? International Journal of
Management and Enterprise Development. 2 (1). pp. 122–139.
Subrahmanya, M.H.B. (2005b). Small-scale industries in India in the globalisation era: performance
and prospects. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development. [Online]. 2
(1). pp. 122. Available from: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=6034.
Thomas, R. & Narayanan, K. (2012). Productivity heterogeneity and firm level exports: case of Indian
manufacturing industry. In: The 11th Annual GEP Postgraduate Conference 2012. [Online].
2012, United Kingdom. Available from:
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/gep/documents/conferences/2012/postgraduate-conference/ronny-
thomas.pdf.
Unel, B. (2003). Productivity trends in India’s manufacturing sectors in the last two decades. IMF
Working Papers. No. 03/22.
Vaijayanti, R. (2013). Problems Faced By the Small Scale Sector– An Analysis. National Monthly
Refereed Journal of Research In Commerce & Management. [Online]. 2 (1). pp. 87–105.
Available from:
http://www.abhinavjournal.com/images/Commerce_&_Management/Jan13/13.pdf.
Ziniya, S.N. (2014). Complexity Of Small Scale Industry In India. RESEARCH HUB – International
Multidisciplinary Research Journal. [Online]. 1 (1). pp. 1–5. Available from:
http://www.rhimrj.com/admin/upload/-upload-AUG14010109.pdf.

Phd literature review sample pdf

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Phd literature review sample pdf

Ähnlich wie Phd literature review sample pdf (20)

Mehr von PhD Assistance

Mehr von PhD Assistance (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Phd literature review sample pdf