Evolution of Modern Industry in India

Industrialization: Meaning and the Classical Sociological Framing

Sociology Optional Notes {PDF}

Complete Notes Package (Paper I & II) | 1000+ Pages | Instant Download

Discounted Price | Buy Now @ ₹600 →

• Industrialization refers to the emergence of machine production based on inanimate power sources such as steam or electricity, replacing the small-minority-freed-from-the-land pattern of even the most advanced traditional civilisations.
• A defining feature of industrial societies is that the large majority of the employed population works in factories, offices, and shops rather than on the land, with over 90% of people in fully industrialised societies living in towns and cities — which is why urbanisation and industrialisation are so often, though not always, associated with each other (Britain, the first industrialising society, was also the first to become predominantly urban).
• Marx, Weber, and Durkheim all associated industry with a common cluster of social features: urbanisation, the loss of face-to-face relationships found in agrarian settings, and their replacement by anonymous, professional relationships in the factory and modern workplace.
• Industrialization also entails a detailed division of labour, where workers often never see the end result of their own repetitive, exhausting contribution — the condition Marx called alienation, in which work becomes something endured for survival rather than enjoyed for itself, its very availability contingent on whether the prevailing technology has any room left for human labour at all.

Industrialization, Equality, and Modernization Theory

• Industrialization brings greater equality in some spheres — caste distinctions matter far less on a train, bus, or in a cyber café — even as older forms of discrimination persist in new factory or workplace settings, and even as economic inequality grows globally alongside declining social inequality; the two often continue to overlap, as in the continuing domination of upper-caste men in well-paying professions like medicine, law, or journalism, or in women being paid less than men for comparable work.
• Early sociologists read industrialization as carrying both positive and negative consequences; by the mid-twentieth century, under the influence of modernization theory, industrialization came instead to be read as both inevitable and positive — with all societies assumed to be travelling the same road toward a modernity ultimately represented by the West.

Phases in the Evolution of Indian Industry

Pre-Colonial and Early Colonial Origins

• The presence of industry in India can be traced back to the Mauryan period and Mughal rule, where large numbers of karkhanas and artisan-based industries flourished.
• British tariff policy and the resulting economic ruin of Indian handicrafts triggered de-industrialisation and a long period of reverse migration back to the villages.
• The Revolt of 1857 created an increased need for communication networks, giving impetus to railways as an industry, alongside the simultaneous growth of the plantation industry — tea and coffee, from 1857 onward.
• The German naval blockade during the First World War forced the British to industrialise India for routine administrative purposes, diversifying Indian industry into paper, sugar, matchmaking, iron, coal, and metallurgy.
• British industrialisation itself produced de-industrialisation in specific Indian sectors and the decline of old urban centres: traditional cotton and silk manufacturing exports declined in the face of Manchester’s competition, cities like Surat and Masulipatnam declined, while Bombay and Madras grew; towns like Thanjavur, Dhaka, and Murshidabad lost their royal courts — and with them their artisans — under British rule.

Post-Independence: The Nehru–Mahalanobis Model

• After 1947, India pursued state-led industrialisation given the long gestation periods and capital requirements industrial development demanded — the Nehru–Mahalanobis model, under which capital-intensive industry sat in the public sector on the expectation of a trickle-down effect that would bring private industry into the FMCG (fast-moving consumer goods) sector.
• At Independence, government took over the “commanding heights of the economy” — defence, transport, communication, power, and mining — sectors only the state had the power and the necessary long horizon to develop, and which private industry needed as a foundation to flourish.
• Within the mixed-economy framework, licensing policy was also used to spread industry across regions — moving major industrial centres beyond the pre-Independence port-city concentration (Madras, Bombay, Calcutta) toward places like Baroda, Coimbatore, Bangalore, Pune, Faridabad, and Rajkot; items like paper and wood products, stationery, glass, and ceramics were reserved for the small-scale sector, which by 1991 employed 72% of the manufacturing workforce against large-scale industry’s 28%.
• Inefficiencies in the public sector, bureaucratic dysfunction, and high wartime inflation together produced very low growth under this model, leading to its abandonment when India liberalised its economy in 1991.

Post-1991: Liberalization, Privatisation, and Globalization

• Since the 1990s, licensing requirements have been removed and private (especially foreign) firms encouraged into sectors once reserved for government, including telecom, civil aviation, and power, while foreign products became freely available in Indian markets.
• Many Indian companies have been acquired by multinationals — Coca-Cola’s purchase of Parle (whose ₹250-crore annual turnover was dwarfed by Coca-Cola’s own ₹400-crore advertising budget) is emblematic — even as some Indian companies have themselves grown into multinationals.
• Disinvestment — the government selling its stake in public sector companies — has proceeded alongside real anxiety among government workers about job security; at Modern Foods, the first company privatised, 60% of workers were forced into early retirement within five years.
• A parallel trend has been the steady replacement of permanent employees with outsourced and contract labour, both domestically and globally, since permanent employment carries statutory obligations (provident fund, gratuity, medical leave, pension) that smaller, competing firms are structurally incentivised to avoid — weakening trade unions’ ability to organise in the process.

Structural Peculiarities of Indian Industrialization

• Comparative data highlights how differently Indian industrialisation has proceeded relative to developed economies: in 1999–2000, roughly 60% of India’s workforce remained in the primary sector (agriculture and mining), 17% in the secondary sector (manufacturing, construction, utilities), and 23% in the tertiary sector — against developed-country patterns where the majority work in services, followed by industry, with under 10% in agriculture.
• Because agriculture’s contribution to growth has declined sharply while services now generate roughly half of output, the sector employing the most people generates comparatively little income for them — a structural mismatch at the heart of India’s employment problem.
• The government’s continuing policy of land acquisition for industry compounds this: such projects rarely employ the surrounding population directly even as they generate significant pollution, and Adivasis — who make up roughly 40% of those displaced by such projects — have repeatedly protested inadequate compensation and the prospect of being pushed into casual labour on the footpaths of India’s large cities.

Socio-Cultural Consequences of Industrialization

• Before industrialisation, Indian society was organised around an agrarian, less-monetised economy, a level of technology where the domestic unit doubled as the unit of economic exchange, a non-differentiation of occupation between father and son (or between brothers), and a value system resting on the authority of elders and the sanctity of tradition rather than on the criterion of rationality.
• Industrialisation has since driven change across three registers: in the economic field, specialisation of work, occupational mobility, monetisation, and a breakdown of the link between kinship and occupation; in the social field, rural-to-urban migration, the spread of education, and a strong centralised political structure; and in the cultural field, the secularisation of belief and faith.

Effects on Family Organization

• The family, once the principal unit of production, has been transformed into a unit of consumption — a few male members now leave home to earn the family’s living rather than the whole family working an integrated enterprise together, affecting both traditional joint-family structure and the relations among its members.
• Factory employment has freed young adults from direct dependence on their families; financial independence has weakened the authority of the household head, and where wives also work and earn, intra-family relations have shifted further still.
• Children have ceased to be economic assets and have become liabilities — child labour has, in some cases, actually increased despite legal prohibition, even as rising educational requirements lengthen dependence on parental support and expensive urban accommodation makes child-care more demanding, separating work and home more sharply than before.

The Joint Family Debate

• Some sociologists have directly challenged the assumption that industrialisation straightforwardly produces nuclear families: studies by M.S.A. Rao, M.S. Gore, and Milton Singer show jointness remaining more preferred and prevalent specifically in business communities, with many formally nuclear families still maintaining widespread kin ties.
• Social historians have separately shown the nuclear family was already a cultural norm in Europe and the United States even before industrialisation, undercutting any simple industrialisation-causes-nuclearisation account.
• Dube observes that even where Indian families live in separate households, younger members still willingly follow their normal responsibilities toward parents and siblings and maintain a sense of family unity and kin solidarity — the supportive role of kin persists, even if it no longer carries the compulsory character of full joint-family obligation.

Industrialization and Caste

• Satish Deshpande observes that in India, capitalism arrived before anything resembling the Protestant Ethic — the commitment to work and self-betterment Weber identified as capitalism’s religious precondition in the West was not a precursor to Indian capitalism but, if anything, followed it.
• Rudolph and Rudolph describe India’s agrarian capitalists as “bullock cart capitalists” — entrepreneurial in orientation but chronically short of capital, illustrating how imperfectly the Western industrial-capitalist template maps onto Indian conditions.
• Industrialisation has measurably loosened, without eliminating, caste’s economic grip: occupational diversification and new professions have created new class and status groups, and (as Andre Beteille observes) higher caste no longer automatically implies higher class — a disharmony most visible in Indian cities, precisely where new job opportunities have opened up fastest.

Contemporary Industrial Policy: The Manufacturing Push

• India’s current flagship industrial strategy is the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, spanning 14 sectors with a total outlay of nearly ₹2 lakh crore, aimed explicitly at lifting manufacturing’s share of GDP toward 25%; by late 2025 it had drawn cumulative investment exceeding ₹2.16 lakh crore, generated over 14 lakh direct and indirect jobs, and pushed electronics production up 146% between FY 2020–21 and FY 2024–25, with mobile phone exports rising sharply.
• The National Mission on Manufacturing, announced in the 2025–26 Budget, extends this ambition further, targeting a 25% manufacturing share of GDP by 2035 alongside a projected 14 crore new jobs — a formal, state-driven attempt to correct the very structural mismatch between employment share and output share that has characterised Indian industrialisation since Independence.