.svg){kind=icon}
.svg){kind=icon}
%201.svg){kind=icon}
%201.svg){kind=icon}
.svg){kind=icon}
.svg)
.svg)
Pramod Sinha
Pramod Sinha holds his Masters in Business Administration (M.B.A.) from IBS (ICFAI Business School), Gurgaon. He is currently working as a consultant at National Institute of Public Finance and Policy (NIPFP). He has previously worked at National Informatics Centre’s 'Open Data Initiative' of Government of India, Credit Analysis and Research (CARE) Ratings, and Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE). His research interests include firm-level analysis and macroeconomic research.
.svg)
The challenge of identifying economic activities of firms
The reliability of India’s GDP estimates has been debated extensively. A key challenge in the construction of macro-aggregates lies in the proper identification of firms’ economic activities as firms can have multiple activities across industries. In this post, Radhika Pandey, Amey Sapre, and Pramod Sinha demonstrate the extent of the identification problem, which is a major challenge in the estimation of value addition in the manufacturing sector.
What does the new IIP series tell us about the state of manufacturing in India?
In May 2017, the Central Statistics Office released the new series of the Index of Industrial Production with 2011-12 as the base year, after a comprehensive revision of computation methods. The series almost entirely reverses the performance picture of Indian manufacturing, showing sharp upward revisions in the growth of activity. This column finds that the new index is likely to show inflated growth during times of falling inflation. Thus, deciphering the actual change in production continues to be difficult.