In fact, economies with comparative advantage in human capital, howsoever measured, have forged ahead of others, particularly in the wake of globalisation. Due to relative deficiency in India's human resources, it is not surprising that the economy has suffered from lowerproductivity in the farm, industrial and services sectors, which, in turn, is attributable, inter alia, to inadequate efforts to upgrade the technical, managerial and professional competence of the working population. This has not only hampered supplies of agricultural products at reasonable prices, but also impinged upon expansion of economy and productivity-linked earning opportunities, thereby suppressing consumer's purchasing power.

The agricultural sector's performance does not compare favourably with other countries, namely China and Indonesia, which are like India populous and heavily dependent on agriculture. For instance, during 1979-93, whereas per capita food production grew at the rate of 1.5 per cent per annum for India, the corresponding figures for China and Indonesia were 3.0 per cent and 2.2 per cent respectively. This variation in growth rates is largely explained by yield rates, which are much lower for India as compared to the the two countries. Against an yield rate (100 kg per hectare)of 26.1 for India in rice/paddy production, the corresponding rates for China and Indonesia are 58.1 and 44.9 respectively. Similarly, yield rates for China in wheat, cotton and groundnut production are higher by 50-300 per cent. Since availability of arable land is two-and-a-half times higher for India (0.20 hectare per capita) as compared to China (0.08), it is possible to augment agricultural production and supplies at affordable costs, provided, of course, farm-sector productivity is increased through concerned efforts. Special attention will have to be paid to long overdue land reforms and improved level of agricultural inputs, particularly such aspects as functional literacy, education and training of farmers to enable them to effectively respond to various polices and programmes, and employ modern techniques of management of agricultural activities. While nearly two-thirds of the working population in India and China are engaged in agriculture, the Indian work force is much less educated and trainedthan in China, as is evident from adult literacy levels, which are 81 per cent and 83 per cent for China and Indonesia respectively, against 52 per cent for India.

In the liberalised environment in which economic competitiveness depends on application of new knowledge and technologies, endeavours should be made to enhance entrepreneurial capacity, at least to the extent attained by other competitors. It is important for two reasons.

One, inability to raise the threshold level of competence will not only adversely affect productivity and production, but also displace uneducated/unskilled labour force owing to increased intensity of knowledge and technology in the functioning of an open economy. This will also create considerable income disparity between those who can and cannot work in the modernising sectors, the economic consequences of which would be disastrous in a federal set-up and democratic polity.

Two, at least 37 per cent of the rural and 46 per cent of the urban work force have no worthwhileproductive assets to generate income to support their livelihood. They largely depend on wages, which, in turn are determined by education levels, training and skills as acquired by them through concerted efforts. Lack of improvements in technical and professional competence of such a vast working population suppresses productivity and purchasing power. As a result, a serious constraint is imposed on augmentation of supplies to match the demand for essential goods and services at reasonable prices. Since the scope for productivity-linked expansion in employment and earning opportunities is narrow, the growth of purchasing power of a majority of people is severely restricted, which partly explains the demand recession for industrial goods.