CHAPTER 3

CONCEPT OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

AND ITS MEASUREMENTS
Development is a dynamic concept. It has different meanings

for different people. In fact, there is no agreement on the meaning of

development among planners and thinkers jSome people say it means

increase in income, others lay emphasis on employment, quality of life

an happiness. Still others give stress on meeting the basic needs of the

people. The only thing on which every one agrees is that development

is necessary; and every one wants, although in his own image and

perhaps in his own way. /

Development has been defined as "a process of growth,

expansion or realization of potential; bringing regional resources into

full productive use"| In another words development is a process of

change aiming at socio-economic transformation of a traditional

societies into modem one which is greatly influence by human beings.

Activities related to the development is generally directed towards

national buildings and socio-economic transformationj Development

planning has also been defined as "any action by the state whose

purpose is to raise the rate of economic growth above that which would

take place without any conscious effort". Development planning is

being done by the state; it has the dual purpose of economic growth

and social structural change; it is comprehensive, covering ever>' sector.

62
region and aspect of life. The achievemeni of a state of development

would enable individuals to make their own histories and geographies

under conditions of their own choosing.

Regional research and regionalization are classic themes of

geography. Ideas of spatial development development compose the

core of the theoretical basis of geography. However, in the epoch of

scientific and technological revolutions the very c o n c e p t s of

'development' and 'space' undergo transformation, this being reflected

in the changes of concepts in the sciences investigating these phenomena

and process. The present chapter is an attempt to elucidate the concepts

of 'development' and 'regional development' by tracing recent

advancement in this fieldl Since 'development' occurs in different socio-

economic settings and takes different forms at national and regional

levels specific to historical and socio-economic circumstances

prevailing there/therefore, a synoptic review of studies of regional

de\ elopment is also made in the last section of the chapter.

The Concept of Development

'Development' is a multidimensional process. There are.

therefore, many interpretations of it. In geographical literature during
the late 1970s and early 1980s, there have come certain works which
attempt to define development. Notable examples include Brookfield's'
(1975) Interdependent Development, Robert's- (1978), Cities of
peasants, Mabogunje's^ (1980), The Development process: a Spatial
Perspective Chisholm's'' (1982) Modern World Development, a

63
Geographical perspective and Harriss's (1982), Rural Development:

Theories of peasant Economy and Agrarian change. Each presents

its own, very different view of 'development' provides a particular

perspective from which further research can take its course. Mabogunje

has identified four main ways in which the term 'development" has

been used: development as economic growth, as modernization, as

distributional justice and as socio-economic transformation. He argues

that for a long time following the Second World War development was

seen simply as economic growth; it implied a rapid rise in productivity

per capita, and a changed economic structure. Holder^ (1968), thus

concentrated on economic development in his book on the tropics,

and Chisholm^ (1982) has described development as "a term used to

signify an evolution of the economic structure accompanying expansion

in total output". Chisholm (1982), goes on to distinguish between

'development' and 'modernization', the latter being seen as the social

transformation of a nation. For Mabogunje'(1980) this is the second

way in which the word 'development' has been used. Development,

still in the sense of economic growth, came to be seen as part of a

much wider process of social change described as modernization.

Lipton'" (1977) has thus, for example seen "development as

modernizing structural change". However, Mabogunje" (1980) also

points out a crucial aspect of this view of 'development' as

modernization is that "to be modern meant to endeavour to consume

goods and services of the type usually manufactured in advanced

industrial nations". He goes on to observe that more recently

de\ elopment has been identified with distributional justice: as a way

64
of reducing the poverty level among the masses or, as it was more

succinctly put, satisfying their 'basic' needs (Mabogunje 1980)'-. For

this to be successful the concept of accessibility was crucial, and

much attention was therefore paid to an analysis of the access of the

poorest of the poor to 'resources' defined in the broadest of terms. In

his last category of views of development, Mabogunje'^ (1980) suggests

that "Scholars of a Marxist philosophical persuation argue that the

questions of distribution and social justice can not be considered or

resolved independently of the prevailing mechanisms governing

production and distribution". This, Mabogunje argues, gave rise to

dependency theory, in which development and under development are

seen as being totally interrelated and also to an emphasis on three

broad issues: the fact that development is human issue, its requirements

of the full mobilization of society and the idea of development is human

issue, its requirements of the full mobilization of society and the idea

of development as a redefinition of a country's international relations.

In this view Roberts"* (1978) has advocated that "Development is an

interdependent process in which some countries and regions acquire

predominant place with in division of labour, using coercion to organize

production elsewhere, as in case of colonialism or control of capital

or advanced technology and market This situation is

expressed in two related concepts that of dependency and that of the
core periphery relationship".

To these four basic concepts of'development' Mabogunje'^ has

added his own, a fifth, which sees "development process as one of

65
spatial organization. The reorganization arises as a result of the fact

that development implies the articulation of a new set of social goals".

While Mabogunje's classification provides a useful frame work for

viewing the nature of work done on 'development' itself. For too long

the concept of 'development' has inculcated a dangerous bias in the

conceptual approach of academics and politicians alike.

In all the definitions of'development' by Mabogunge there has

remained a thread of the old economic definition: that development, to

a greater or lesser extent, implies increased productivity, high levels of

consumption per capita and a shift from primary to secondary and

tertiary economic activities. 'Development' is normally equated simply

with economic growth. Few studies attempt to grasp the more complex

question of social change. The concentration of attention on economic

de\elopment is no doubt partly due to its easier measurement; how

indeed is social development to be measured? hi addition to the attention

paid to economic issues, there lies the implicit assumption that, in

general development should take place along the lines of western

countries. The use of the word 'development' tends to imply that there

is a set of developed nations, normally identified with the Western

nations astride the north Atlantic ocean, and a set of less developed, or

under developed or developing, countries, which given the right set of

condition, will in their turn be able to become developed. This, for

example, is the implicit assumption behind Rostow's'^' (1978) sequence

of stages of economic growth. E\en the concept under development,

w Inch introduces the idea that the poorer countries of the world are

66
poor in some way because of the existence of rich ones and thus

overcomes the problem associated with sequential concept of growth

and mamtams an underlying concern with economic issues. Historically,

economic change has always been associated, sooner or later, with

the degree of social change. With much recent research having been

on economic change, there is perhaps now a need to re-evaluate the

social impact of the economic change and, for those involved in

implementing it, to redress the balance by planning for social rather

than economic change. The experience of Green Revolution in India,

a classic example of economic growth, was nevertheless associated

with increased social inequality (Pearse, 1980)'^ and today remains a

pertinent reminder of the need for an integrated approach to change.

Similarly. Saudi Arabia's economic transfomiation is taking place in

association with strict efforts to maintain the traditional social and

religious structures unchanged. This separation of permitted economic

change and forbidden social change is already leading to growing

tensions within the kingdom and must remain a source for concern.

During the last two decades 'development studies' have become

a far more interdisciplinary field of enquiry. Geographical approaches
within this field have much to offer. Gould"* (1982) thus argues that
"in the area of rural-urban interaction geographers have, in the theories
and techniques at their disposal and in their appreciation of the need
for detailed data collection, a comparative advantage over other
disciplines". Likewise Mabogunje, in conceptualizing development as
spatial recognization, has continually emphasized the importance of a

67
geographical awareness in 'development'. Harriss and Harris'^ (1979)
have, nevertheless, noted that there is a "dearth of studies exploring
the connections between development and the imperatives of
management of the biosphere".

'Development' is thus defined as a process of betterment for a

large human group. It includes economic development as well as social

transfomiation. The United Nations University Expert Group on Human

and Social Development in November 1975 gave the meaning of

'development' as "Development is a fundamentally about, by

and for human beings. Development must therefore begin by identifying

human needs. The objective of development is to raise the level of

living of the masses of the people and to provide all human beings

with the opportunity to develop their potential". Thus the definition

clarifies that the development implies not only expansion in quantitative

terms but also structural changes in the society and its economy as

expansion proceeds. Structural changes includes institutional, social

and economic (sectoral as well as spatial) aspects. This implicit

assumption behind the lumping together of all these aspects is that

change in one element depends on and generates changes in all others.

Secondly, development means change in a desired direction and at a

desired speed. The direction and rates of change will depend upon the

goals and objectives of development. Thirdly, development presupposes

policy interventions direct or indirect in achieving the given goals and

objectives. Fourthly, development also involves socio-psychological

transformation of human beings to prepare them for the eventual as

68
well as current benefits occurring from the changing socio-economic

structure of society; and finally development, development involves

temporal, sectoral and spatial phasing and integration of planning.

The Concept of Regional Development

The notion of development in the context of regional

development refers to a value positive concept which aims at enhancing

the levels of the living of the people and general conditions of human

welfare in a region. It is a value positive concept because development

is not only a change but a change for better, just as plant develops into

a tree and a child into an adult and there is no reversal of the position

attained. Economic development is reflected through growth of output

and national income. Thus an important indicator of economic

deveJopment is the increase in per capita income. Development is neither

class neutral nor it is uniformly available across the regions. The

development process benefits some classes of the society more than

other classes. It helps certain regions to attain higher levels of

development than other regions. This gives rise to social disparities as

well as regional disparities. Such a situation operates because of the

behaviour of parameters of development.

Regional development has been interpreted as intra-regional

development design to solve the problems of particular regions. The
concept has a multidisciplinary approach. The first connotation of
regional development is economic in which the difference in growth in
terms of volume and structure of production, income, employment is

69
measured to know differences in the levels of development. This

procedure is employed both for national as well as subnational areas.

The concept of regional development may further be viewed in

connection with plan, policies and balanced development. The policies

of regional development are aimed at reducing the regional disparities

existing in a particular to minimum and to find out the possible means

for developing the region as a whole. Economic planners have viewed

regional development problems from sectoral angles, so that regional

development has become synonymous with sectoral planning for a sub-

national territory with the result that all the weakness of central planning

have been introduced at the regional level keeping in view the lack of

interest in spatial organization and development.

B a l a n c e d regional development d o e s not mean equal

development of all regions. It simply implies fullest development of
the potentialities of an area according to its capacity so that the benefits
of overall economic growth are shared by the inhabitants of all the
regions. Balanced regional development does not mean self sufficiency
in each region. Neither does it mean equal level of industrialization nor
a uniform economic pattern for each region. This type of development
is practically needed for the under developed countries like India to
minimized backwash effects, to rapidly develop the economy smoothly,
to develop and conserve resources, to maintain political stability defend
the country, to over come social evils and to promote and secure
larger employment opportunities. To find the success on these points
balanced regional development has been an important policy objective

70
in India since the beginning of the planning era. This idea has been

mooted as a corrective process to minimize the differences in the

degree of economic and social development in the different parts of

the country. Such differences are manifest in per capita income,

employment pattern, standard of living, house hold expenditure, extent

of saving, rate of capital formation, growth rate in productive sector,

education and social progress.

At the micro level (villages and development blocks), the aim of

regional development is generally conceived to minimize disparities in

the level of development as observed in differential access to resources

and differences in the economic structure and social transfomiation.

These differences are generally found in the industrial structure, access

to infrastructural facilities and to amenities. The purpose of the

researcher is to measure differences in the general level of socio-

economic development to fmd out differences between small areas

and to suggest alternative distribution of facilities and amenities so

that observed differences in access to resources are minimized.

Furthermore, the researcher has to fmd out differences in the pace

setting process as development of technology' and modernization so

that these process are strengthened in areas lagging behind. This will

facilitate the full use of potentialities offered by a region.

Historically the concept of planning has had closer links with

administration and politics than with social and economic factors.
However, the concept of Regional planning has assumed greater
importance in developing countries because it brings out the

71
development potentialities of each region, suggests strategies for

development, considers both the human and material resources within

each region, is comprehensive in nature and concentrates on inter-

sectoral problems and area studies. Thus if handled properly, it has the

potential to be an eflficient tool to create a better environment for human

beings. Christaller, Philbrick and Dickenson gave importance to both

spatial and functional regions especially with respect to regional

development.

Parameters of Development
Natural environment, technology and institutions are the three

basic parameter of economic development. Natural environment

indicates the direction of economic development. It simultaneously

puts a limit on the extent of development (at the given level of

technology). For example, the major economic activity has been

agriculture in river valleys, lumbering in forested region and fishing in

the coastal regions. Moreover, the extent of production levels in all

these activities are limited by the level of technology available to the

people in the respective regions. Technology is the tool with which the

human beings interact with the natural environment, but technology

has its own characteristics. Primitive technology is size neutral and is

available to all irrespective of their income levels. Intermediary

technology is size biased and is available only to those who have

some investable surplus. Sophisticated and large scale technology is

so costly that it has to be brought under social control, becomes

available to all irrespective of their size after a nominal payment. Thus,

72
the intermediary technology creates income disparities with a social

group and across the regions. The institutions have been created by

human beings for accelerating the pace of economic development.

But when tliese institutions become rigid, they become a cause of

declaration rather than acceleration of the pace of economic

development. That is why the institutions are modified or changed

with the passage of time. Thus, the level of economic development is

the function of the harmonious interaction between natural environment,

technology and the institution created in a region.

Measurement of Regional Development

It has been seen earlier that measurement of levels of development
is an essential stage in policy formulation and planning. Measurement
is the assignment of numbers to the properties of empirical objects or
e\ ents in such a way that one to one correspondence is maintained
between the relations among the properties measured and the
characteristics of the number assigned. Regional development can be,
and is conceived of in many ways. Inherent in the very use of the term
is some sense of significant variations in the way in which people
produce and consume, work, live and play. To record and measure a
vast mosaic of variation in the nation as a whole and in its various
parts of regions is no simple undertaking and even the most
sophisticated statistical tools can hardly do full justice to measure
comprehensively all aspects of regional development, as the variables
so \ a s t and diverse in nature and some even escape the limit of
quantification. However, a useful starting point is to make a distinction

73
between the variations that would seen to be associated with the volume

of economic activities and social progress. The most commonly

employed measure, really crude indicators of economic and social

welfare-of improvement or decline in the average status of families

and the individual are the relative levels of per capita income as it is

assumed that economic health is invariably followed by social progress.

However recently it has been argued that per capita income or any

other measure of economic progress as levels of production and

consumption are partial measures of development as these do not

necessarily measure variations in the economic structure and least of

social health. They touch only tangentially most of the essential elements

of development. The analysis of regional development, therefore, poses

the problem of measurement. In early seventies there has come up the

social indicators approach. This approach points outs that development

goes beyond some aggregate measure of levels of consumption and

production of goods and services. This approach emphasizes that

variables indicating social status should also be included when

measuring levels of development. As such, there is no single criterion

on which levels of development can be assessed. Therefore, an analysis

of regional development proceeds with the selection of suitable

indicators which measures not only differences in economic structure,

and production, but also indicate variation in health, education, housing,

leisure, social security and a number of other variables. However, their

selection depends on the availability of statistics at appropriate unit of

analysis.

74
 Measurement of Regional Development in India
Recently there have been many studies of regional development
m India and its parts. These are analysis of spatial variations resource
endowment and of sharp contrasts in levels of development in different
parts of the country. An attempt has been made to review some of
these studies.

The foremost work is being done by Techno-Economic Surveys.

These surveys examine the state's physical resources in their aggregate

by a rapid technical and economic audit of the resources of the state

and prepare and overall plan for development of states in a 10-15 years

perspective in relation to desired growth rate of the economy of the

state. The main drawback of such studies is the lack of integrated

planning of resources of national importance since every state has been

treated in isolation.

There are several other studies which have been conducted for

specific purposes in which the emphasis is on the area and its problem

in contrast with sectoral studies. The Central Arid Zone Research

Institute (CAZRI) at Jodhpur has been studying the problems of semi

arid Rajasthan and neighbouring areas. Various experiments and data

compiled in respect to geomorphology, vegetation and climate provide

valuable material for generalization over wide areas.

A regional approach to the study of urban problem is emphasized

by the Town and Country Planning Organisation. Master Plans of
large cities provide a wealth of information on the interrelationship of

75
the city with neighbouring areas.

In 1956, the Planning Commission at a conference on Regional

Survey and planing (Delhi, 19-20, October, 1956) recognized that it

would be necessary to conceive planning regions for the country at

three levels: macro, meso and micro. Since then considerable work

has been done and much thought has been given to 'plaiming region'

by the geographers. Studies made by Learmonth (1964), Parkasha Rao

(1962) and Bhat (1962) laid the groundwork for further studies. In

1962, the Regional Survey Unit prepared a tentative regional framework

for resource development,^" for the country based on an analysis and

synthesis of various distribution pattern of resources physical

complexes, cropping patterns and the distribution of urban centres,

natural resources and major industries. In this study major regions

and regional norms of development were described in quantitative

terms. The guiding principle in this scheme was that major region should

have minimum disparities and maximum distinctiveness from their

neighbours in respect of their character and resources for development,

further, Bhat^'(1964) suggested a scheme of seven macro economic

regions based on the distribution of resources and possibilities of

developing regional production complexes. He also considered another

set of five macro-economic regions derived by grouping states together.

Based on work done by Indian Statistical Institute and earlier

census regions, Nath prepared a scheme of resource development
regions and divisions, which was published by planning commission
in 1964". In this scheme regions were demarcated on the basis of

76
topography, geological formations, soils, rainfall, agricultural landuse,

cropping pattern, population density, and occurrence of mineral

resources. The map prepared by Bhat^"* indicates the pattern of industrial

development in the background of resource potential in different areas.

Contiguous areas of urban industrial development occurring along the

edge of the Krishna-Godavari Delta or from Coimbatore plateau to

the Kerala Cost are the resultants of a relatively developed agricultural

based industries. The patterns of levels of development as brought by

mapping the index values seems to explain the causes in disparities in

levels of development in an objective way. The study shows that the

areas having low levels of development coincided roughly with those

having low land productivity or lack of good resource base and

occurrence of small and stagnant towns without much industrial activity

and intertown relationship. On the other hand, Hyderabad occurs on

an 'Island' of development in relatively under developed area of

Telengana. Influence of Five Year Plans on the development have been

analysed at some length by Learmonth with special reference to Mysore

State-\

The earliest study in the level of development was made by

Schwartzberg^^ (1962). The use of a composite index of development
brought out areal differences in levels of development, although these
differences could not be further put rigorous regional analysis as the
data were on the basis of states (Prior to 1956) which are not ideally
suited to reveal regional differences.

a^fmore systematic attempt in the construction

77

fin Univsi
of a composite index of selected variables which permit several stages

of analysis in relation to the group of variables contributing to overall

development; with a study of All India Level it may be regarded

essentially as a contribution to methodology in areal differentiation by

factor analysis. To be of use in policy decisions these studies need

some of the important variables like per capita income and production

which are directly related to the levels of development. Using some

what different method Mitra^" (1965) has grouped 324 districts of India

into four levels of development. For this study he has selected 63

variables and these were grouped into six convenient blocks. The

variables pertain to natural factors, agricultural infrastructure, traditional

economy, human resources, organized industry etc. This study is unique

for its simplicity and systematic approach. Nevertheless, the author

himself pointed out in his introductory remarks that, the lack of more

important indices and methods of giving weights to different variables

is a limitation to this study. The data of per capita income is different

to calculate below the state level. The National Council of Applied

Economic Research has arrived at district level per capita income and

the proportion of 'income' of each district according to primary,

secondary and tertiary activities. These data, though crude, serve to

relate the income pattern with land use structure and occupational

patterns and urban-industrial development in broad regional analysis^^.

Sen Gupta and Sadasyuk have worked out the economic

regionalization of India in an attempt to provide a hierarchy of regions
useful in national planning'". A scheme of planning regions has been

78
started in the National Atlas Organization. The Planning Commission

itself has brought out yet another scheme of 'Resource Development

Regions and Divisions of India^'.

Nath^^ (1970) on the basis of state and district level data worked

out the regional patterns of economic development and economic

growth within India. Analysis of the level of economic development

has been made for both states and districts, but analysis of growth

rates has been made only for states. The level of economic development

of states has been measured in two ways: (i) on the basis of per capita

income, and (ii) through the use of a composite index of economic

development based on four indicators. Analysis of economic growth

has been made with the help of data on growth rates of population,

agricultural output, per capita value added in industry, and per capita

income. He mapped the states of India into two categories of relatively

developed and less developed.

Prakash^^ (1977) assessed the regional inequalities and economic

development in relation to infrastructural facilities in India. He selected
several infrastructural factors: the various population characteristics
that reflect the development of infrastructure determinants of
industrialization, the development of power, irrigation and agricultural
implements and road transportation, communication and banking
services. He obtained two important conclusions from the analysis of
development of individual regions in various fields: (i) there is no region
which is equally developed or underdeveloped in all fields. For example,
developed areas like TamilNadu, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh,

79
Maharashtra, Kerala and Punjab are underdeveloped in one or most of

the fields like literacy, workforce participation rates, per capita power

consumption, irrigation or mechanization of agriculture while the

underdeveloped regions like Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, Aninachal

Pradesh are quite developed in one or more fields like literacy, density

of population, workforce participation rates, urbanization, power

consumption and road transportation. It would, therefore, be more

useful for policy purposes to identify individual areas of deficiency

rather than to bracket regions as developed or underdeveloped in general

so that the remedial measures to make up the deficiencies could be

evolved and implemented; (ii) the other important result is that the

some region/regions come under the category of developed regions if

one indicator is used, while they fall in the category of underdeveloped

regions if some other indicator relating to the same field is used for

classification. It imphes that an appropriate indicator should be chosen

to determine the stage of development of the regions.

Hemlata Rao^" (1984) while studying the regional disparities,

dimensions and typology of backwardness in Karnataka applied the

technique of factor analysis in delineating the regions. The study covers

175 talukas (villages) of Karnataka and examines inter taluka diversities

in the land utilization pattern, cropping pattern, agricultural development,

patterns of industrial spread, and industrial developments, level of

development of education, health, transport, communication, power,

banking and cooperative sectors and overall development level during

period between 1975-76 and 1979-80. The study concludes that in

80
Karnataka there is not only wide diversity in natural endowments but

also wide disparities in the levels of sectoral and aggregate

development. All backward regions are not the same, rather they have

different dimensions and typology of backwardness. The causes of

backwardness also vary from region to region.

The studies of regional patterns of development in India provide

a conceptional and methodological framework to extend them to micro

level with necessary modifications. The present study employs

extensively concepts and methodology developed in these studies to

analyse the patterns of regional development in the area under study.

REFERENCES
1. Brookfield, H., Interdependent Development Methuen, London,
1975.

2. Roberts, 'Q.,Cities of peasants: The Political Economy of

Urbanization in the Third World, Edward Arnold, London,
1978.

3. Mabogunje, A.L., The Development Process: A Spatial

Perspective, Hutchinson University Library, London, 1980.

4. Chisholm, M., Modern World Development: a Geographical

Perspective, Hutchinson University, London, 1980.
5. Harriss, J. (Ed.), Rural Development: Theories of Peasant
Economy and Agrarian Change, Hutchinson University Library,
London, 1982.

81
6. Hodder, B.W., Economic Development in the Tropics, Methuen,

London, 1968.

7. Chisholm, M., op. cit., P.M.

8. ibid, P.M.

9. Mabogunje, A.L. op. cit., PP. 38.

10. Lipton, M., Why poor people Stay Poor: Urban Bias in World

Development, Temple Smith, London, 1977.

11. Mabogunje, A.L. op. cit., PP. 38-39.

12. ibid.,^. 39.

13. ibid.,V. 42.

14. Roberts, B. op. cit., P. 13.

15. Mabogunje A.L. op. cit, P. 49.

16. Rostow, W. W., The World Economy: History and Prospect,

Macmillan, London, 1978.

17. Pearse, A., Seeds of Plenty , Seeds of Want: Social and

Economic Implications of The Green Revolution, Clarendon

Press, Oxford, 1980.

18. Gould, W.T.S., Rural - Urban Interaction in the Third World,

Area, 14, P 334.

19. Harris, J.J. and Harris, B., Development Studies, Prog. Hum.

Geog., 3, P 576.

20. Rao, V.L.S.P. and Bhat, L.S., A Regional Framework for

Resource Development in India, Bombay Geographical Magazine

Vol.10, N o . l , 1963, P P 35-50.

21. Bhat, L.S., Aspects of Regional Planning in India, Liverpool

Essays in Geography London, 1964.

82
22. Idem, Regional Concepts and Planning Regions with Special

Reference to Planning in India, in Regional Planning (ed.), R.P.

Misra, Mysore, University of Mysore, 1969, PP. 73-86.

23. Planning C o m m i s s i o n , G o v e r n m e n t of India R e s o u r c e

Development Regions and Divisions of India, New Delhi, 1964.

24. Spate, O.H.K. and Learmonth, A.T.A., India and Pakistan,

London, 1967, PP. 331 -364.

25. Learmonth. A.T.A., R e t r o s p e c t On Project in A p p l i e d

Geography in Mysore State, India, in R.W. Steel and R.M.

Prothero (eds.). Geographers and the Tropics Liverpool Essays,

Liverpool, 1964, PP. 323 - 348.

26. Schwartzberg, J.E., Three approaches to the Mapping of

Economic development in India Annals of the Association of

American Geographers, Vol. 52, 1962, PP. 455 - 468.

27. Pal, M.N., Regional Disparities in the Level of Development

in India, Fifth Economic conference. New Delhi, 1965.

28. Mitra, A., Levels of Regional Development in India, census of

India, 1961, Vol. I, Part I - A (i), 1965.

29. National Council of Applied Economic Research, The District

Income Differentials 1955-56, Occasional Paper, No.6, New

Delhi, 1963.

30. Sen Gupta, P. and Sadasyuk, G., Economic Regionalization

oj India: Problems and Approaches, in A. Mitra (ed.). Census

of India Monograph Series, Vol. I, No.8, New Delhi, 1961.

31 Government of India, Planning c o m m i s s i o n . Resource

Development Regions and Divisions of India, New Delhi, 1965.

83
32. Nath, v.. Levels of Economic Development and Rates of

Economic Growth in India - A Regional Analysis, The National

GeographicalJoumal of India, Vol.15, Part 3-4,1970, PR 183 - 198.

33. Prakash, S., Regional Inequalities and Economic Development

with Special Reference to Infrastructural Facilities in India, Indian

Journal of Regional Science, Vol. IX, No.2. 1977, PP. 172 -

195.

34. Rao, H., Regional Disparities Dimension and Typology of

Backwardness and Strategy for Development, ICSSR Research

Abstract Quarterly, Vol. 13, No.3 and 4, 1984, PP. 1-10.

84