From Table 1 it is clear that Andhra Pradesh is one of the worst performers of all states in India in terms of aggregate economic growth over this period. Not only is the annual rate of growth well below that of the other southern states, but its rate of growth has been only marginally superior to the much-maligned “BIMARU” states of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. In per capita terms the growth rate appears in a slightly better light, largely because of the slower rate of population growth over the period, but still is the worst among southern states.
Table 2 >>
 
Also, the myth that the state of Kerala is a major laggard in terms of growth also gets blown by the evidence. As Tables 1 and 2 show, Kerala is the sixth most dynamic state in terms of aggregate state GDP growth, and the fifth in terms of growth of per capita income. It is a comment on the lack of knowledge of most analysts that the most common mainstream discussion on Kerala’s economy is not on what have been the elements and causes of such growth, but still on why the state has not grown and has exhibited relative stagnation, even though that is not the actual experience.
 
It is also evident that West Bengal has exhibited much greater economic dynamism than it has been given credit for. In fact, West Bengal shows up very well in comparison to other states, with the fourth highest annual rate of growth, after Gujarat, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Its growth performance has been superior to that of states like Maharashtra, Punjab and Haryana which are generally supposed to be high growth states.
 
And this growth in West Bengal appears to have been evenly spread across the different sectors. Thus, while certain service sectors such as communications and trade have experienced double-digit annual rates of growth, even the material producing sectors have performed very respectably, with agriculture growing at 6 per cent per annum and manufacturing at 7 per cent over this period.
 
However, it is also true that some standard perceptions appear to be confirmed, in terms of the low growth of states like Bihar, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh, and the extremely poor economic growth in Assam. The most rapidly growing states in economic terms over the period are Gujarat, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. However, Maharashtra, Haryana and Punjab, typically thought of as high-growth states, do not appear to be so in relation to the performance of other states.
 
Tables 3a-3d show the behaviour of constant price GDP (in index number terms) of aggregate GDP over the period 1993-94 to 1998-99. While these broadly confirm the picture provided by Table 1, they do bring out some other interesting features. Thus, in Andhra Pradesh economic growth appear to be not just on the low side but also more volatile than elsewhere. Rajasthan, which is not covered in Chart 1, shows a surprisingly high rate of economic expansion. The common impression that the southern region economically outperforms the other regions is not borne out by the evidence, which show some high growth and some low growth states in all regions.
Table 3a >> Table 3b >> Table 3c >> Table 3d >>