Bring out various factors responsible for degeneration of village Industries in India.(UPSC PYQ)

Click here to join telegram group

Village industries once formed the economic backbone of rural India, providing employment, sustaining local needs, and reinforcing the self-sufficient village economy. These industries—spinning, weaving, pottery, metalwork, oil pressing, carpentry, etc.—were closely integrated with the agrarian social structure and the jati-based occupational system.

However, with the advent of colonial rule, industrialization, and capitalist penetration, these industries witnessed a sharp decline and degeneration.


1. Impact of British Colonial Policies

  • Destruction of handicrafts through imports:
    The British flooded Indian markets with cheap machine-made goods from England, especially textiles, leading to the ruin of traditional handloom and spinning industries.
    • Example: Bengal’s muslin and handloom industries collapsed by the 19th century.
  • Deindustrialization (as per Dadabhai Naoroji & R. C. Dutt):
    Colonial economic policy transformed India from an exporter of manufactured goods to an exporter of raw materials and importer of British finished products.
  • Exploitation of artisans:
    The zamindari system and colonial taxation squeezed surplus from artisans and peasants, reducing purchasing power and destroying local demand for village goods.

2. Impact of Industrialization and Urbanization

  • Rise of modern factories:
    Mechanized production in cities displaced manual village industries.
    • E.g., textile mills in Bombay and Ahmedabad led to decline of rural weaving.
  • Urban-centric development:
    State investment favored cities, leaving rural industrial infrastructure neglected.
    Artisans migrated to urban centers as wage laborers, further eroding rural skill networks.

3. Social and Structural Factors

  • Breakdown of jajmani system:
    Traditional patron–client relations that ensured steady demand for artisanal goods disintegrated under capitalist and cash-based economy.
  • Caste-based specialization weakened:
    Industrial capitalism diluted hereditary occupational structures (as noted by M. N. Srinivas) leading to the disorganization of artisanal castes.
  • Lack of capital and credit:
    Artisans lacked access to formal credit and were exploited by moneylenders. Absence of cooperatives restricted modernization.

4. Technological and Educational Backwardness

  • Failure to adapt to new technology:
    Traditional crafts continued with outdated tools and lacked R&D or skill upgradation.
  • Illiteracy and lack of technical knowledge:
    Prevented artisans from competing with mechanized production.

5. Post-Independence Economic Changes

  • Neglect in Five-Year Plans:
    Although Gandhian thought emphasized revival of Khadi and Village Industries, actual state focus remained on large-scale and heavy industries under Nehruvian planning.
  • Inadequate institutional support:
    Agencies like KVIC (Khadi and Village Industries Commission) made limited impact due to bureaucratic inefficiency and poor marketing.

6. Cultural and Aspirational Changes

  • Shift in values and consumption:
    Rural youth prefer urban employment; demand has shifted to industrial products.
    Traditional crafts lost prestige and were seen as low-income, low-status occupations.

Conclusion

The degeneration of village industries in India is the outcome of colonial exploitation, capitalist industrialization, technological stagnation, and socio-cultural change.
These industries—once symbols of self-reliant rural economy and community interdependence—were eroded by market forces and state neglect.

As Gandhi envisioned through Swadeshi and Gram Swaraj, revival of village industries remains essential not only for economic sustainability but also for restoring the ethical and cultural fabric of rural India.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *