Government success, failure of the market: a case study of rural India
Contrary to current thinking, in this paper we argue that a careful examination of government intervention suggests that governments did not fail in all their interventions. For example, in terms of achieving self-sufficiency in food requirements, Indian government intervention was highly successful. However, in terms of solving rural poverty, the government left it to the market, and the market failed to resolve the poverty problem. Rural poverty, instead of falling, increased and subsequently, the government had to intervene to address the poverty.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 23 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIRA20 |
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CIRA20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:irapec:v:23:y:2009:i:4:p:485-501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.