Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11718/23471
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDholakia, Ravindra H.-
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-22T08:45:08Z-
dc.date.available2021-01-22T08:45:08Z-
dc.date.issued2015-10-10-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11718/23471-
dc.description.abstractThis comment points out an erroneous assumption in the calculations and central argument of Rajakumar and Shetty ("Gross Value Added: Why Not the Double Deflation Method for Estimation?," EPW, 15 August 2015) that reverses almost all their inferences and conclusions. If construction and service input prices are also considered in the construction of the input price deflators, the double deflation method may further raise the manufacturing real income rather than depressing it. Conditions under which single or double deflation can better approximate the Index of Industrial Production growth rate are also discussed.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherEconomic & Political Weeklyen_US
dc.subjectManufacturing sectoren_US
dc.subjectDouble deflation methoden_US
dc.subjectIndustrial production growth rateen_US
dc.subjectGrowth of manufacturing sectoren_US
dc.titleDouble deflation method and growth of manufacturing: a commenten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Double_Deflation_Method_and_Growth_of_Manufacturing.pdf
  Restricted Access
Double deflation method and growth of manufacturing: a comment169.09 kBAdobe PDFView/Open Request a copy


Items in IIMA Institutional Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.