INTRODUCTION:

Public policy is normally conceived as government action to address some problem. The central focus is, as an old phrase has put it, who gets what, when and how. Policy is the end result of a complex decision-making system, which encompassing many actors. Public policy, in its most simple definition, is that which government does. According to James Anderson, who had puts it more formally public policy means ‘‘A relatively stable, purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern’’.

Another standard view is by Peters, who says ‘‘public policy is the sum of government activities, whether acting directly or through agents, as it has an influence on the lives of citizens’’ (Steven A. Peterson (2008), p.1632).

Economic development is defined as public, and often governmental, intervention in a market to facilitate private-sector investment and encourage job growth. More over, it has been defined as “a program, group of policies, or activity that seeks to improve the economic well-being and quality of life for a community, by creating and/or retaining jobs that facilitate growth and provide a stable tax base”. Economic development as a public policy concern involves the underlying assumption that institutions, and specifically governments, matter to communities and that their interactions with and interventions in favor of certain public values, such as fuller employment, increased investment, or improved quality of life, are favorable involvements from a policy perspective (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1520).

The economic development programs may be instituted as a response to decline, including undesirable changes, such as job losses accompanied by growing unemployment, social exclusion, physical decay and worsening living conditions. In addition, economic development programs may also be instituted to make improvements in areas that are not necessarily experiencing decline but where improvement and additional benefit is nevertheless desired such as growth of jobs, growth of number of companies and growth of property values. Economic development policies may serve different intended functions, at various times and in distinct contexts (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1520). There is a close relationship existing between the public policy and economic development. In fact, through the respective government public policies only economic development takes place in a state or a country.

Public Policy and Economic Development: A Theoretical Framework:

Government has traditionally played an important role in the process of economic development. From the perspective of public policy analysis, the importance of government to economic development is primarily based on three inter-related roles, functions, or activities. First, government plays a pivotal policy role in identifying and formulating important development policies and programs to promote economic growth and social change. Next, government serves a critical managerial role in assuring the successful institutional.

development and reform to implement many identified development policies and programs. Last, government provides a supporting role in maintaining positive and stable political and social environments to provide the

opportunity and time for the success of development policies and programs (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.602).

As far as the role of state or government involvement in economic development is concerned, many studies of economic structure adjustments in developing countries and economic reforms or transitions in post socialist nations also address the issue of governmental involvement in economic development. With regard to structural adjustments, for example, researchers emphasize the importance of the administrative and political functions of the state in the successful implementation of an adjustment program or a reform policy (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.603). India is one of the best examples of this implementation, when it got effected by the severe economic crisis in early 1990s.

Similarly, many studies of economic transitions in post socialist countries emphasize the issue of stabilization in the process of economic transformation and identify the important role and involvement of government to assure the success of the transition. For example, Liou identified five major roles of government in the process of China’s post-Mao economic reforms, including such as 1) government as a promoter of economic growth (i.e., formulating and implementing growth policies); 2) government as a manager of the economy (i.e., managing fiscal and monetary policies); 3) government as a distributor of income (i.e., distributing resources between different regions and among different social groups); 4) government as a regulator of industry (i.e., regulating for social and economic reasons); and 5) government as a protector of citizens and business (i.e., protecting citizens and business from foreign attacks as well as criminal and illegal activities)( Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.603).

The study of governance is important to economic development researchers and policy makers. For researchers, the challenge is to systematically collect objective data from different countries and regions to test, verify, or create various development concepts, strategies, and theories. For policy makers, the challenge is to consider different environmental factors in their countries and to design an appropriate model of governmental intervention through the analysis of many development theories, strategies, and experiences. The interaction of researchers and policy makers is critical to the success of economic development because of the significant consequence of negative development results (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.602).

Since the 1990s, many international aid organizations have recognized the problems of governance in their efforts to promote economic and social development in many developing countries. The governance problems come from two sources such as the abuse of public funds by local elite groups and the ignorance of local political problems by the international donors. The donor organizations believe that good governance is necessary for economic development in these countries. They promote good governance concept and emphasize the need for governance reform in these countries(Kuotsai Tom Liou(2008),p.603).The World Bank defined the concept of governance and it also identified four specific elements of governance such as 1) accountability (i.e., officials being answerable for government behavior), 2) participation (i.e., the involvement of citizens in the development process), 3) predictability (i.e., legal environment being conducive to development), and 4) transparency (i.e., the availability of information to the pubic and the clarification of government rules, regulations, and decisions) (Kuotsai Tom Liou(2008),p.603).

The Pierre and Peters explained that governance is about government’s changing role in society and its changing capacity to pursue collective interests under severe external and internal constraints.They also identified four elements of governance such as 1) the importance of networks (i.e., the use of networks to dominate public policy); 2) from control to influence (i.e., government’s influence through a continual process of bargaining and persuasion); 3) blending public and private resources (i.e., the importance of network framework); and 4) use of multiple instruments (in developing and

implementing public policies) (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.604).

Besides these, Shepherd pointed out the importance of other governance areas to economic and social development, including, for example such as public expenditure patterns and revenue growth, local institutional development and rural local development, inclusiveness and access into sector reforms, the elimination of bad government, and the incorporation of civic society and non-Government organizations. Similarly, Kliksberg also emphasized other public management capacity to support economic and social development, including such as the importance of coordination between economic and social policy, the improvement in intra organizational coordination, the need for decentralization, the potential of participation, and the renewal of organizational structure (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.604).

The governance approach to economic development changes the traditional dominant role of government operation and welcomes the participation of private and non-governmental organizations and alternative methods of operation. Network coordination between government agencies and these organizations is one of the major requirements for the success of economic development (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.604).

As far as the traditional policy approaches to economic development are concerned, typical public policy approaches to economic development have historically included “collaboration between local governments and chambers of commerce, business surveys and calls on individual businesses, streamlined zoning and permitting processes, promotional and marketing materials, infrastructure investment, tax increment finance districts, and tax abatements”. The basic four policy strategies for economic development vary in visibility and distribution and include subsidies like tax incentives (high visibility, targeted), coordination of services (low visibility, targeted), advertising/marketing (dispersed approach, prominent), and the provision of technical assistance to businesses (low visibility, not focused on specific industries) (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1520).

Attraction activities are exogenous policy instruments that rely on relocation of an existing firm from one locale to another, thus bringing “new” employment and investment to the prevailing community. These programs can be referred to as first-wave economic development programs and involved “subsidized loans or direct payments to firms for relocation expenses, tax reductions, subsidies applied to the cost of plant facilities or utilities, and competitive and expensive industrial recruitment programs”. Retention and expansion activities, “endogenous development policy instruments” which “focus on promoting the development and expansion of indigenous firms, capitalizing on the strengths and assets of the city, and growing economic activity from within the city rather than through luring mobile capital” followed in the early 1980s second wave of policy (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1521).

As far as emerging approaches to economic development are concerned, toward the end of the 1990s to the present, the third wave of economic development policy, focusing on community alliances and public private partnerships, has involved “networks that leverage capital and human resources to increase the global competitiveness of a group of strategically linked firms”. More recently, emerging policy initiatives have had a stronger focus on international development. Enhancing regional or even national-level export potential is a facet of economic development that has received greater notice, including in the developing world (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1521).

Renewed attention has also been given to clusters – groupings of businesses in close proximity that are in similar or supporting trades benefit from reduced input costs and useful sharing of knowledge; this theory is generally related to the concept of agglomeration economies and remains an emerging area as understanding of clustering continues to mature. This third wave of development has also included a focus on the creative class. Creative class theory focuses on occupations and the skills and needs of creative people in a knowledge economy and eschews the industry/firm focus of traditional economic development (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1521).

Economic development policy has shifted to attract creative class members, with new options for that purpose being added to the economic development toolbox such as Festival marketplaces, aquariums, enclosed downtown malls, pedestrian streets, high-technology corridors, artist incubators, river walks, and casinos. Art spaces are involved in neighbourhood revitalization and tourism activities, community outreach and arts education, and incubating artistic production; this indicates the relationship that exists between economic development and the social-cultural wellbeing of communities (Christopher L. Atkinson (2018), p.1521).

Significance of Public Policy and Economic development: International Perspective:

Issues of international development have given rise to two important sets of policy debates over the post war era. The first involves how to best promote national development. During the second half of the twentieth century, several distinct stages evolved, beginning with a consensus that was followed by a series of heated debates. Economic development practices in the United States constitute the second major policy domain linked to international development. Until the 1980s, economic developmental strategies within the United States had little concern or connection with international development, but this has changed radically since then, both because globalization has had a major impact on the American economy and because there is growing recognition of parallels in the central issues and dilemmas (Cal Clark (2008), p.610).

Globalization, for example, has certainly been a double-edged sword in regard to its impact on the United States, as the new technologies that are driving it both undercut the nation’s position in traditional industries and create the foundation for a new economic surge in the high-tech and advanced services sectors. In terms of policy, the commitment of the United States to a relatively small government and laissez-faire policies has created a paradox for reacting to the challenges of globalization. Business is able to be flexible and innovative, allowing the United States to become the world leader in most of the emerging Information Age industries. However, the country is constrained in its attempts to improve education, build new infrastructure, and retrain workers whose skills have become obsolete, all vital tasks for retraining competitiveness at the top of the international product cycle, leaving the U.S.’s future competitiveness as something of an open-ended question (Cal Clark (2008), p.613). This is the significance of international perspective on public policy and economic development.

Perspectives of Public Policy and Economic development:

The important role of government in the modern economic system has been well recognized and accepted in the literature of public finance, development economics, and political economy. For example, with regard to specific government functions and activities in the market economy, Adam Smith emphasized three duties of the government (state) such as 1) protecting the society from violence and invasion by other societies; 2) establishing an exact administration of justice; and 3) erecting and maintaining certain public works and institutions. From the public finance perspective, Musgrave and Musgrave promoted three functions of government such as 1) the allocation of social and other goods that the market will not of itself provide; 2) the equitable distribution of income and wealth; and 3) the stabilization of unemployment and control of inflation (Kuotsai Tom Liou (2008), p.602).

Stern summarized the related literature by identifying five different arguments for governmental intervention in the economy. They were as follows 1) a concern for market failure (arising from sources such as externalities, public goods, and imperfect information); 2) a concern to prevent or reduce poverty and improve income distribution; 3) the assertion of a right to certain facilities or goods (e.g., education, health, and housing); 4) the importance of paternalism (e.g., relating to education, pensions, and drugs); and 5) the rights of future generations (e.g., concerns about the environment) (Kuotsai Tom Liou(2008),p.602).

Economic development is a policy priority for most local, regional, and central governments. Economic development is a means to reduce unemployment, increase tax bases, leverage other resources from the community, and curry public favor and support. When economic development slows, stagnates, or declines, it has an adverse effect on the community and political as well as economic leaders are held responsible. Therefore, the competition for new and expanding businesses can be intense and economic development programs may include a broad range of incentives to lure firms from other communities and to cultivate new firms locally. Financing economic development is a crucial concern and one that raises fundamental issues concerning who should pay for government programs, and how much should and can be invested (William L. Waugh Jr. (2008), p.582).

The financing of economic development programs may be direct in terms of investments of public monies in specific firms or sites, or indirect in terms of encouraging private sector investment. To some extent, there is an expectation that economic development will be guided and funded by those who reap the most direct benefit, private firms and individuals. However, governments guide choices and invest public resources to ensure that economic development serves the best interests of the community. In fact, many governments have pursued development with little consideration given to the social and economic impact on their communities, but such unfocused approaches are much less common today (William L. Waugh Jr. (2008), p.582).

If we see historical perspective of economic development, historically, the source of funding has played an important role in the type of economic development activities within a community. For example, due to federal funding, many local planning offices were involved in the preparation of economic development planning documents in the late 1970s in USA. Economic development committees were established to prepare Overall Economic Development Programs (OEDP) funded by the U.S. Economic Development Administration. In addition, again because of the availability of federal funding, many local governments were involved in urban renewal efforts that improved the real estate of communities (C. Fred Baughman (2008), p.565).

As far as the citizen participation in economic development is concerned, political theorists such as Robert Dahl, Charles Lindblom, Mancur Olson, William Riker, Anthony Downs, and Alexis D’Tocqville, to name a few have long been interested in citizen participation as a requisite for democracy (Terry F. Buss, F. Stevens Redburn and Marcela Tribble(2008),p.569).The 1990s witnessed an increased interest among policy makers, scholars, and advocates in expanding and deepening citizen participation processes, particularly in community and economic development activities. The Bush Administration, early in its tenure in USA had philosophized about the idea of a ‘‘citizen-centric’’ government. The Clinton Administration, under the leadership of Vice President Al Gore, had worked on numerous citizen participation initiatives as part of its ‘‘reinventing government’’ program (Terry F. Buss, F. Stevens Redburn and Marcela Tribble (2008), p.569).

The most notably scholars, Robert Putnam, in books such as Bowling Alone, called attention to the decline in civil society. Redburn and Buss, in their monograph, on Modernizing Democracy, called attention to the power of new information technology and the Internet to engage citizens in public life in more sophisticated ways, and outlined a program to accomplish this goal. Advocates, such as the Orton Family Foundation, have invested heavily in the development and marketing of software— CommunityViz—to improve the quality of citizen deliberations on community and economic development policy and programming (www.communityviz.com) (Terry F. Buss, F. Stevens Redburn and Marcela Tribble (2008), p.569).

Public Policies initiatives implemented by the Government of India to ameliorate an impact of COVID-19 pandemic on its Indian macro economy:

The world has witnessed several epidemics such as the Spanish Flu of 1918, outbreak of HIV/AIDS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Ebola. In the past, India has had to deal with diseases such as the small pox, plague and polio. All of these individually have been pretty severe episodes. However, the Covid-19 which originated in China in December 2019 and over the next few months rapidly spread to almost all countries of the world can potentially turn out to be the biggest health crisis in our history. Many experts have already called this a Black Swan event for the global economy (S. Mahendra Dev and Rajeswari Sengupta (2020), p.1).

India recorded the first case of the Covid-19 disease on January 30, 2020. Since then, the new confirmed cases have increased steadily and significantly in India. The Covid-19 in India had come in different waves. In order to curb the spread of the virus, the government of India announced a nationwide four phased lock-downs starting March 25, 2020 which continued for 31^st May,2020. All non-essential services and businesses, including retail establishments, educational institutions, places of religious worship, across the country stayed closed during this period and all means of travel were stopped, aside from some inter-state transport permitted towards end April and early May to let migrant workers, stranded pilgrims, tourists and students return to their native places. At the time this was the most far-reaching measure undertaken by any government in response to the pandemic. The overall macro impact of countrywide lockdown has brought nearly all economic activities to an abrupt halt (S. Mahendra Dev and Rajeswari Sengupta (2020), p.12).

The significant number of causalities also happened in the world which includes India due to the Covid-19. The Covid -19 was mostly disappeared due to scientists discovered the vaccination against this virus and many people got vaccinated in the world, which includes India. However, the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in India was largely disruptive. The growth of the economy has slowed down due to shutdown of different productions channels. Reverse migration of workforce and consequent shortage of labour, resulted in further deceleration of economic growth. While COVID 19 pandemic has thrown several challenges on Indian economy, agriculture sector has shown resilience through the crisis (NABARD (2022-23)). Some of the major initiatives policies taken by Government of India to bring the economy of the country back on track are analysed below.

On 12^th May 2020, the BJP led NDA Indian Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi had announced a special economic and comprehensive package of Rs.20 lakh crore - equivalent to 10% of India’s GDP; to fight COVID-19 pandemic in India, the Prime Minister gave a clarion call for Aatma Nirbhar Bharat or Self-Reliant India Movement. Atma Nirbhar Bharat package is based on five pillars such as Economy, Infrastructure, System, Vibrant Demography and Demand. The key measures proposed in the economic package are on reforms, MSME business, agriculture and allied sectors, migrant workers, civil aviation, defence, energy, housing and social sector (NABARD (2022-23)).

Anurag Singh Thakur, then Union Minister of State for Finance and Corporate Affairs in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha (Parliament of India’s lower house or house of the people) said that the fundamentals of the economy remain strong as gradual scaling back of lockdowns, along with the astute support of Atma Nirbhar Bharat Mission has placed the economy firmly on the path of recovery. Net payroll data of Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) as on 20^th January, 2021 shows a net increase of new subscribers in EPFO of 78.58 lakh in 2019-20 as compared to 61.1 lakh in 2018-19. These estimates are net of the members newly enrolled, exited and re-joined during the year as per records of the EPFO. Giving more details about the schemes launched by the Government of India, the BJP led NDA then Minister mr. Anurag Singh Thakur said that the Government announced a special economic and comprehensive package under AtmaNirbhar Bharat including measures taken by RBI amounting to about rs. 27.1 lakh crore – more than 13 per cent of India’s GDP to combat the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and to revive economic growth (Ministry of Finance (2021)).

The package included, among others, in-kind and cash transfer relief measures for households, employment provision measures under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Rojgar Abhiyaan and increased allocation under MGNREGS, credit guarantee and equity infusion-based relief measures for MSMEs and NBFCs and regulatory and compliance measures. Structural reforms were also announced as part of the AtmaNirbhar Bharat Package which, inter alia, included deregulation of the agricultural sector, change in definition of MSMEs, new PSU policy, commercialization of coal mining, higher FDI limits in defence and space sector, development of Industrial Land/ Land Bank and Industrial Information System, revamp of Viability Gap Funding scheme for social infrastructure, new power tariff policy and incentivizing States to undertake sector reforms(Ministry of Finance(2021)).The implementation of the package was reviewed and monitored regularly. The analysis of some of the salient achievements included such as.

· Under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package valued at Rs. 2.76 lakh crore, free food grain for 80 crore people, free cooking gas for 8 crore families, and direct cash transfer to over 40 crore farmers, women, elderly, the poor and the needy were provided.

· As on 3rd February, 2021, a total of 323.19 crore person-days have been generated in the current FY 2020-21 under MGNREGS.

· Under Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Rojgar Abhiyan, 50.78 crore person-days of employment was generated incurring an expenditure of Rs. 39,293 crores.

· Rs. 3 lakh crore Collateral-free Automatic Loans for Businesses, including MSMEs: Under Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) 1.0, Rs. 2.14 lakh crore has been sanctioned to 90.57 lakh borrowers of which Rs 1.65 lakh crore has been disbursed to 42.46 lakh borrowers as on 8th January, 2021. Additionally, ECLGS has been extended to 26 stressed sectors identified by the Kamath Committee and the healthcare sector till March, 2021 with operational guidelines issued on 26th November for maintaining the momentum of credit disbursements to close to 45 lakh business units. As on 8th January 2021, additional credit amounting to Rs. 15,571 crores has been sanctioned to 2,772 borrowers under ECLGS 2.0, of which Rs. 3,344 crores has been disbursed to 1,188 borrowers.

· Rs. 45,000 crore Partial Credit Guarantee Scheme 2.0 for NBFCs are being provided. Purchase of portfolio of Rs. 27,794 crores has been approved by PSBs and Rs. 1400 crore are currently in process of approval/negotiations as on 4th December, 2020(Ministry of Finance (2021)).

· Rs. 30,000 crore Additional Emergency Working Capital Funding for farmers through NABARD is being provided. Rs. 25,000 crores has been disbursed so far as on 4th December, 2020. Under balance Rs. 5000 crore Special Liquidity Facility for smaller NBFCs and MFIs, Rs. 130 crore has been disbursed as on 4th December, 2020.

· Centre had enhanced the borrowing limit for the States from 3% to 5% of GSDP for FY2020-21. Under the Special Window provided by Central Government to borrow the shortfall arising out of GST implementation on behalf of States, Government of India has borrowed an amount of Rs. 78,000 crores in 13 instalments, at an average interest rate of 4.75 per cent, and passed it on to the States and UTs as on 25th January, 2021.

· Rs. 50,000 crore liquidities through TDS/TCS rate reduction has been effected (Ministry of Finance (2021)).

However, the Central government of India’s budget 2021-22 had also announced a number of measures to support broad-based and inclusive economic development under six pillars are analysed below.

I) Health and Wellbeing:

Key measures include a holistic approach to strengthen healthcare with focus on three areas such as Preventive, Curative, and Wellbeing, Rs. 35,000 crore for COVID-19 vaccine, roll out of Made-in-India Pneumococcal Vaccine across the country, launching of a new centrally sponsored scheme PM AtmaNirbhar Swasth Bharat Yojana in addition to National Health Mission, Mission Poshan 2.0, Universal Coverage of Water Supply, Urban Swachh Bharat Mission 2.0, Clean Air, Scrapping policy, etc (Ministry of Finance (2021)).

II) Physical and Financial Capital, and Infrastructure:

The key measures include Production Linked Incentive scheme (PLI) in 13 Sectors, Mega Investment Textiles Parks (MITRA), 7 Textile Parks, expansion of National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) to 7,400 projects, creation of institutional structures for Infrastructure Financing, National Monetization Pipeline, sharp increase in Capital Budget, economic corridors, flagship corridors/expressways, National Rail Plan for India (2030), future dedicated freight corridor projects, strengthening of urban infrastructure, launching of National Hydrogen Energy Mission 2021-22, extension of Ujjwala Scheme to cover 1 crore more beneficiaries, development of a world class Fin-Tech hub, increasing FDI limit in insurance sector from 49 percent to 74 percent, setting up of Asset Reconstruction Company Limited and Asset Management Company, recapitalization of PSBs easing compliance requirement of small companies, amendments to the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) Act, 1961, decriminalization of the Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) Act, 2008, promoting start-ups and innovators by incentivizing the incorporation of one person companies, strengthening NCLT framework, new policy for Strategic Disinvestment, Government Financial Reforms such as universal application of Treasury Single Account (TSA) System, rationalization of Centrally Sponsored Schemes, development of Multi-State Cooperatives, etc(Ministry of Finance(2021)).

III) Inclusive Development for Aspirational India:

The key measures include ensuring MSP at minimum 1.5 times the cost of production across all commodities, extension of SWAMITVA Scheme to all States/UTs, enhancing agricultural credit and infrastructure funds, investments to develop modern fishing harbours and fish landing centres, One Nation One Ration Card, Rs. 15,700 crore budget allocation to MSME Sector, etc.

IV) Reinvigorating Human Capital:

Key measures include qualitative strengthening of 15,000 schools under National Education Policy, setting up of 100 new Sainik Schools, Higher Education Commission of India, Central University in Leh, 750 Eklavya model residential schools in tribal areas, revamped Post Matric Scholarship Scheme for welfare of SCs, measures to enhance skilling like realignment of existing National Apprenticeship Training Scheme (NATS), etc (Ministry of Finance (2021)).

V) Innovation and R and D:

Key measures include Rs. 50,000 crore outlay under National Research Foundation (NRF), Rs. 1,500 crore for financial incentives to promote digital modes of payment, PSLV-CS51 launch, Gaganyaan mission activities, launching of Deep Ocean Mission, etc.

VI) Minimum Government and Maximum Governance:

The key measures include reforms to rationalize the functioning of Tribunals, National Commission for Allied Healthcare Professionals Bill in Parliament to ensure transparent and efficient regulation of the 56 allied healthcare professions, National Nursing and Midwifery Commission Bill to bring transparency, efficiency and governance reforms in the nursing profession, setting up of a Conciliation Mechanism for quick resolution of contractual disputes, Rs. 3,768 crore for India’s first digital census, Rs.1,000 crore for the welfare of tea workers especially women and their children in Assam and West Bengal, etc (Ministry of Finance (2021)).

However, after real GDP contracted in FY20/21 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, growth bounced back strongly in FY21/22, supported by accommodative monetary and fiscal policies and wide vaccine coverage. Consequently, in 2022, India emerged as one of the fastest growing economies in the world, despite significant challenges in the global environment such as including renewed disruptions of supply lines following the rise in geopolitical tensions, the synchronized tightening of global monetary policies, and inflationary pressures(https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/india/overview).

In FY22/23, India’s real GDP expanded at an estimated 6.9 percent. Growth was underpinned by robust domestic demand, strong investment activity bolstered by the government’s push for investment in infrastructure, and buoyant private consumption, particularly among higher income earners. The composition of domestic demand also changed with government consumption being lower due to fiscal consolidation.

(https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/india/overview).

CONCLUSION:

To sum up, India is a successful country in order to overcome the slowdown of its economic growth due to the Covid-19. India had been picked up very quickly its economic development by implementing its various successful central government of India’s public policies such as Atma Nirbhar Bharat or Self-Reliant India package etc. It is a fact that presently Indian economy is one of the fastest growing economy in the world. The India’s economic growth has been improved significantly. As per the Forbes India 2023, among the top 10 largest economies in the world, India’s rank was five. So, India is the fifth largest economy and its aim is to become a third largest economy very soon in the World.

REFERENCES:

1. Steven A. Peterson. Public Policy. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

2. C. Fred Baughman. Economic Development and Organization. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

3. Terry F. Buss, F. Stevens Redburn and Marcela Tribble. Economic Development, Citizen Participation and. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

4. William L. Waugh Jr. Economic Development, Financing. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

5. Kuotsai Tom Liou. Economic Development: Governance Concepts and Issues. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

6. Cal Clark. Economic Development: International. In Evan M. Berman and Jack Rabin (Eds). Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy. Second Edition. New York. Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. 2008

7. Christopher L. Atkinson. Economic Development Policy. In Ali Farazmand(ed.). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Cham. Springer. 2018

8. S. Mahendra Dev and Rajeswari SenguptaCovid-19: Impact on the Indian Economy. Mumbai. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research. 2020 http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/WP-2020-013.pdf

9. NABARD. (2022-23). The COVID-19 Pandemic – Initiatives. https://www.nabard.org/auth/writereaddata/CareerNotices/1005221244the-covid-19-pandemic-initiatives.pdf

10. Ministry of Finance. Steps taken by Government to ameliorate impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Indian economy. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1696278. 2021

11. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/india/overview

Received on 28.03.2024 Modified on 23.04.2024

Res. J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2024;15(2):137-144.

DOI: 10.52711/2321-5828.2024.00020