CPR Insights | (Crudely) Estimating Domestic Product for ‘City-Regions’

Figure A: Estimated Share of Gross Domestic Product for ‘City-Regions’ (2022-23)

Source: Various reports of State Departments of Economics and Statistics. Anmol Patlan assisted in compiling the data

Figure A shows the relationship of the share of ‘city-region’ in the gross domestic product (GDP) with its population share. Kolkata is an outlier, as the only ‘city-region’ whose share in GDP is less than its share in population. For the ten ‘city-regions’, the aggregate share of ‘city-region’ domestic product in GDP was 21.1%, which is more than double that of its population share in 2011, which was 9.6%, reflecting the higher per capita domestic product, compared to the national average, associated with these large ‘city-regions’. Note that this is not all urban, as the ‘city-region’ as defined here, includes both urban and rural populations. 

But, unlike China, India does not estimate economic activity at the city level, except Delhi, which is a state-level entity, so, its gross state domestic product (GSDP) is available along with all other states. So, how was this ‘city-region’ domestic product generated? In this situation, the following simple but crude exercise was conducted.

There has been some effort to generate district domestic product estimates (DDP) but these vary widely by state, with some states providing recent updated estimates and others that have not provided estimates for over a decade. The top ten cities by population in 2011 were considered. Each of these ‘city-regions’ were associated with a district or set of districts (for Bengaluru, Chennai, Hyderabad and Kolkata). The Appendix gives the details of the districts that each ‘city-region’ were associated with. For each of these districts (except Jaipur, for which the estimate was directly available), the 2022-23 DDP estimate was calculated in the following manner. For each district, the share of DDP to the state’s GSDP was calculated for the latest two years for which data was available (except the years 2020-21 and 2021-22, which were excluded due to the pandemic). The average share of these two years was then multiplied into the state’s GSDP for 2022-23 to generate the estimated DDP for 2022-23. For ‘city regions’ associated with only one district, the DDP is considered the domestic product for the ‘city-region’ and for ‘city regions’ associated with a set of districts, the sum of the DDP for those districts were taken as the estimate. The specific calculations are given in Appendix A.

Appendix A

 

ADDENDUM

Figure B: Estimated Share of Gross Domestic Product for ‘City-Regions’ (2022-23)

Source: Various reports of State Departments of Economics and Statistics. Anmol Patlan assisted in compiling the data

After the blog was put out on Thursday, I received feedback that it did not reflect the spatial spread of the metropolitan region boundaries for many cities. As mentioned earlier, this is a crude estimate, both in defining the city region and its share of GDP. Nevertheless, some adjustments have been made, viz. to Mumbai (including Thane and Raigad) and Kolkata (including Haora and Hugli) on the western bank of the Hooghly river and Bengaluru (including Ramanagara and excluding Tumakuru, which has its own urban development authority and is a smart city in its own right!). Other possible adjustments, e.g. in Hyderabad and Chennai, have not been made. Surat ‘city region’ is Surat district, not the five districts in the report of NITI Aayog. It is also clarified that the Pune ‘city-region’, i.e., district, includes both the Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad municipal corporations.

A revised Figure B and Appendix B is provided. As can be seen, the broad pattern remains similar. For the ten ‘city-regions’, the aggregate share of ‘city-region’ domestic product in GDP was 23.9%, which is more than double that of its population share in 2011, which was 11.4%. For four cities (excluding Delhi), the share of the ‘city-region’ in the GSDP is quite high, almost at 40% or more for Hyderabad (47%), Kolkata (41%) and Bengaluru (40%) and fairly close for Mumbai (37%). All these cities are capitals of their states. Indeed, the Mumbai-Pune agglomeration accounts for almost half the GSDP of Maharashtra, among our most developed states. The other two capitals, Chennai and Ahmedabad, account for a quarter of their state GSDP and Jaipur, just under one-seventh. Surat and Pune are the only two non-capital cities.

Appendix B

From the Archives | 2nd Edition

 

For over half a century, the Centre for Policy Research has been at the heart of some of the most significant policy discourses in India.

From the Archives is an attempt to tell CPR’s history from its archival records and trace its journey. The series will revisit CPR’s research initiatives, publications, and interactions with national and global policymakers that have helped it mount the challenge of inclusive, actionable change.

CPR During 1984 – 88

The years of 1984-88 were marked by crucial turning points in India’s polity and the world at large. Northern India was engulfed in a series of anti-Sikh riots following Indira Gandhi’s assassination, and an agrarian crisis riddled the countryside. As for geopolitics, a protracted Cold War necessitated an ever-evolving foreign policy for a Non-Aligned country like India. Diplomatic ties with NAM nations—famously recovering from the ravages of colonialism—were crucial in this period.

During this time, CPR continued to develop research on the projects it had initiated in preceding years and introduced new areas of study in keeping with the times. The Centre pursued uninterrupted research on the themes of industrialisation, national integration and regional

cooperation in South Asia, and contributed to topical discourses of national importance with renewed energy. This research was communicated to the public through seminars, workshops, books, academic papers, surveys and newspaper articles.

Geopolitics

 

The Centre approached relationships between South Asian countries vis-à-vis the Superpowers in a manner that would protect the sovereignty and collective interests of India and its regional neighbours. To this end, CPR collaborated with the International Development Research Centre, Canada on a five-year-long research project. CPR also organised a SAARC-ASEAN cooperation workshop in New Delhi in 1987.

Banking and Economy

 

The State Bank of India instituted a Chair in International Banking and Economy at the Centre in 1984. The Chair grappled with crucial economic questions regarding the proposed establishment of Mumbai as an International Financial Centre, overseas operations of Indian banks and India’s foreign commercial borrowings.

The studies aimed to identify avenues for enhancing economic cooperation and trade potential within South Asia and between India and SouthWest Asia or the Persian Gulf.

 

Society and Politics

 

The Centre also conducted studies on sociological issues in India. The research on violence, with emphasis on communal violence and riots, examined the socio-economic and institutional factors behind violence and suggested policy changes to mitigate and avoid violent upheavals in India. Studies on reservation policies in the country were introduced during this time. The  research looked at the impact of reservations on the lives of Dalits and Adivasis (SCs/STs) and OBC communities, as well as the politics of anti-reservation movements in the country.

 

Food Security and Health

Two allied research areas, food security and health and nutrition policy, were also advanced. These studies remain relevant today. Research on food security looked at the endemic problems of rural poverty, unemployment, and sluggish growth in the agricultural sector, largely addressing the question of availability. Research on health policy dealt with qualitative and quantitative aspects of implementation to address the question of access.

 

Other Engagements

Senior Fellow Mr. B.G. Verghese led the Ganga-Brahmaputra-Barak Basin Project at the Centre, researching transboundary river water management and conflict resolution in the basin. CPR also continued its engagement with the themes of federalism and problems of governance in India.

Founder-Director Dr. V. A. Pai Panandikar led a survey on public administration supported by the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) covering the period from 1979 to 1988.

This is the second edition in this series. Stay tuned for more!