UPSC MainsECONOMICS-PAPER-II202510 Marks150 Words
हिंदी में पढ़ें
Q3.

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (c) What were the economic consequences of the 'Drain of Wealth' theory as practised during the British rule in India? Analyse.

How to Approach

To answer this question effectively, one must first define the 'Drain of Wealth' theory, crediting its chief proponent. The body should then systematically analyse the profound economic consequences across various sectors, such as industry, agriculture, and overall capital formation. It's crucial to explain *how* this drain impacted India's economy, leading to impoverishment and underdevelopment. Conclude by summarising the long-term structural damage inflicted on the Indian economy.

Model Answer

0 min read

Introduction

The 'Drain of Wealth' theory, primarily articulated by Dadabhai Naoroji in his seminal work "Poverty and Un-British Rule in India" (1867), postulates that a significant portion of India's national wealth and resources was systematically transferred to Britain without any equivalent economic return. This unidirectional flow occurred through various mechanisms, including high salaries and pensions of British officials, 'Home Charges' (expenses incurred in Britain for India's administration and military), interest on public debt, and profits from British investments. This theory became a foundational critique of British colonial rule, exposing its exploitative nature and the structural impoverishment it caused in India.

Economic Consequences of the 'Drain of Wealth'

The systematic drain of wealth from India had profound and far-reaching economic consequences, creating a legacy of underdevelopment and poverty that persisted long after independence. These consequences can be categorised as follows:

1. Depletion of National Capital and Investment

  • Stunted Industrial Growth: The continuous outflow of wealth severely curtailed domestic capital formation, preventing the emergence of an indigenous industrial base. Resources that could have been invested in industrialisation were siphoned off.
  • Lack of Infrastructure Development: While some infrastructure like railways and telegraphs were built, their primary purpose was to serve British commercial and strategic interests, not broad-based Indian development. Genuine public welfare investments suffered.
  • Decline in Savings: The high taxation, land revenue, and exploitation reduced the purchasing power and savings capacity of Indians, further limiting capital available for reinvestment.

2. De-industrialisation and Economic Dependence

  • Ruin of Traditional Industries: Indian traditional cottage industries, especially textiles, collapsed due to competition from cheaper, machine-made British goods and discriminatory trade policies. Artisans lost their livelihoods.
  • Transformation into Raw Material Supplier: India was systematically transformed into a supplier of raw materials (like cotton, jute, indigo) for British industries and a captive market for finished British goods, preventing its own industrial growth.
  • Increased Dependency: India's economy became increasingly dependent on Britain for manufactured goods, capital, and technology, stifling local innovation and making it vulnerable.

3. Impoverishment and Agrarian Distress

  • Widespread Poverty and Famines: The constant outflow of wealth led to widespread poverty and frequent devastating famines (e.g., Bengal Famine of 1770, late 19th-century famines). Resources needed for development and welfare, including famine relief and agricultural improvements, were drained away.
  • Exploitative Land Revenue Systems: Systems like Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari, and Mahalwari maximised revenue collection, leading to peasant indebtedness, land alienation, and agricultural stagnation. Resources that could have been reinvested in agriculture were diverted.
  • Commercialisation of Agriculture: Forced commercialisation of agriculture, often for cash crops, exposed peasants to market fluctuations and exploitation, further exacerbating their economic distress.

4. Fiscal Burden and Balance of Payments Imbalance

  • Home Charges: A significant portion of India's revenue was used to pay for 'Home Charges,' which included pensions of British officials, interest on public debt, and administrative expenses, placing an enormous fiscal burden on the Indian taxpayer.
  • Export Surplus without Return: India maintained an export surplus, but the earnings were retained in England, effectively meaning India was exporting wealth without receiving equivalent imports or benefits in return.

The drain theory highlighted how India's resources financed Britain's industrial revolution and imperial expansion, while India itself remained economically backward, structurally dependent, and impoverished.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the 'Drain of Wealth' theory accurately captured the destructive economic policies of British rule, which systematically siphoned off India's resources, capital, and potential for development. This economic exploitation resulted in de-industrialisation, widespread poverty, agrarian distress, and a severe depletion of national wealth, hindering India's ability to embark on an independent growth trajectory. The theory not only provided a powerful intellectual basis for the Indian nationalist movement but also profoundly shaped India's economic structure, leaving a lasting legacy of underdevelopment and informing post-independence economic policies aimed at self-reliance.

Answer Length

This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.

Additional Resources

Key Definitions

Drain of Wealth Theory
The Drain of Wealth theory, propounded by Dadabhai Naoroji, describes the systematic transfer of resources, revenues, and capital from India to Britain during colonial rule without any commensurate economic return, leading to India's impoverishment.
Home Charges
Home Charges referred to the expenses incurred by the British government in England on behalf of India, paid from Indian revenues. These included salaries and pensions of British officials, interest on Indian public debt, and military expenses.

Key Statistics

Dadabhai Naoroji estimated that approximately £8 crore to £30 crore were drained annually during different periods of British rule, representing up to 6-7% of India's national income, which significantly impacted capital formation and living standards.

Source: Dadabhai Naoroji, "Poverty and Un-British Rule in India"

Between 1758 and 1765, East India Company servants reportedly sent home nearly £6 million, an amount more than four times the total land revenue collection of the Nawab of Bengal in 1765, highlighting the early stages of wealth drain.

Source: Historical estimates on early drain, often cited by economic historians like R.C. Dutt

Examples

De-industrialisation of Indian Textile Industry

The thriving Indian handloom weaving industry, which had a global market, suffered immensely due to the influx of cheap, machine-made textiles from Britain, supported by discriminatory tariffs and British policies. This led to mass unemployment and the ruin of skilled artisans.

Famines in British India

The late 19th century witnessed numerous severe famines (e.g., Great Famine of 1876-78, Indian Famine of 1899-1900), which were exacerbated by the drain of wealth, as resources for food security, irrigation, and relief were inadequate due to colonial policies and outflows.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who were the other prominent economists who supported or further developed the Drain Theory?

Besides Dadabhai Naoroji, prominent Indian nationalists and economists like Romesh Chunder Dutt (R.C. Dutt) and Mahadev Govind Ranade also extensively critiqued British economic policies and provided further analysis of the drain of wealth. R.C. Dutt's "Economic History of India" (1901) is another seminal work on this topic.

How did the Drain of Wealth impact India's ability to respond to natural calamities?

The continuous drain of wealth severely weakened India's economic resilience. Resources that could have been invested in irrigation, infrastructure, and famine relief measures were unavailable, making the country highly vulnerable to natural calamities and exacerbating the impact of famines, leading to millions of deaths.

Topics Covered

Indian HistoryEconomyEconomic HistoryColonialismNational Income