Impact of rural infrastructure on performance of livestock sector in Uttar Pradesh
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v90i4.104225Keywords:
Disparities, Infrastructure, Livestock, Rural, RegionalAbstract
This paper examines the emerging trends and growth of livestock sector at disaggregate level in Uttar Pradesh (UP) from 2004–05 to 2015–16. The share of crop sector in GSDP had declined sharply while livestock sector gained a significant share due to consistent higher growth in agricultural sector of the state. The regional level result indicated that Western UP outperformed Eastern, Central and Bundelkhand regions in that order with high disparities across the regions in case of livestock sector as well as rural infrastructure. Moreover, Fixed Effects model attested a positive and significant relationship between value of output by livestock and rural infrastructure index. It suggested that adequate development avenues via rural infrastructure, extension services, value chain development and research investments can boost the growth of livestock sector and mainstreaming the livestock development. Also, the state can utilize the opportunities by promoting livestock as a dominant approach towards livelihood diversification as adopted by other states as well. This will not only take care of the already overstressed agriculture sector but will also be instrumental in attaining the objective of doubling farmers’ income.
Downloads
References
Barro R J. 1990. Government spending in a simple model of endogeneous growth. Journal of Political Economy 98 (5, Part 2): S103–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/261726
Chen W and Lin H. 2002. The sustainable development of Agricultural Infrastructure. China Rural Survey 1: 9–21.
Ellis F. 1998. Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. Journal of Development Studies 35(1): 1–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220389808422553
Ellis F. 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Fan S, Hazell P and Thorat S. 2000. Government spending, growth, and poverty in rural India. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82(4): 1038–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0002-9092.00101
Government of India. 2014. Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, New Delhi.
Gulati A S Fan and Dalafi S. 2005. The Dragon and the Elephant: Agricultural and Rural Reforms in China and India MTID Discussion Paper 87.
Hausman Jerry A. 1978. Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46: 1251–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1913827
Kodong O and Ojah K. 2016. Does infrastructure really explain economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa? Review of Development Finance 6: 105–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rdf.2016.12.001
OECD. 2008. Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators. OECD Publishing, pp. 1–162, Paris.
Palei T. 2014. Assessing the impact of infrastructure on economic growth and global competitiveness. Procedia Economics and Finance 23: 168–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00322-6
UP Statistical Abstract. 2017. Economics and Statistics Division, State Planning Institute Planning Department, Uttar Pradesh.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The copyright of the articles published in The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences is vested with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, which reserves the right to enter into any agreement with any organization in India or abroad, for reprography, photocopying, storage and dissemination of information. The Council has no objection to using the material, provided the information is not being utilized for commercial purposes and wherever the information is being used, proper credit is given to ICAR.
How to Cite
