Skip to main content
Log in

Local Governments’ Impact on Market Accessibility of Enterprises: Understanding the Location Choices of Enterprises in Hajipur, India

  • Article
  • Published:
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper seeks to determine the extent to which the government impacts the market accessibility of manufacturing enterprises in developing countries, specifically in the event of insufficient infrastructure. The paper utilizes a questionnaire-based survey of 153 enterprises of Hajipur in the Indian state of Bihar. On the basis of a statistical analysis of responses to the open-ended questions collected from representatives of the surveyed enterprises, the authors find that considerations of consumer market and profit directly drive the agglomeration of enterprises beyond (all) the other (examined) factors. The authors examine the relationship between local government support and market accessibility by using two methods of analysis, viz. OLS regression and the average treatment effect. There are six indices of local government support, covering particular subsidies, joint subsidies for production, and general support. The four indices for market accessibility have been constructed by assigning three-scale and five-scale categorization schemes of the locations of final production in both ascending and descending orders. The authors also find that the government support helps enterprises reduce cost and facilitates the sale of the enterprises’ final product in more distant markets. This research provides a new perspective on the role the government can play in fostering state-level prosperity in developing countries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Source: Google maps

Fig. 2

Source: http://urban.bih.nic.in/Docs/CDP/CDP-Hajipur.pdf. Urban Development and Housing Department Government of Bihar: City Development Plan (2010–2030) of Hajipur

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The data are for 2013–2014. See Government of Bihar. Economic Survey, 2016–2017, p. 128. Available at http://finance.bih.nic.in/Documents/Reports/Economic-Survey-2017-EN.pdf.

  2. In Table 4, estimate of some important characteristics by state for the years 2009–2010 in Annual Survey of Industries 2009–2010, the industrial net value added in Bihar is ₹ 232,130 lakhs, while it is ₹59,211,387 lakhs in India.

    In Table 3, principal characteristics by Major States in Annual Survey of Industries 2010–2011, the industrial net value added in Bihar becomes ₹ 441,499 lakhs, while that in India is ₹ 70,457,581 lakhs.

    Central Statistics Office (Industrial Statistics Wing), Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India (2010–2011). Annual Survey of Industries 2009–2010. Retrieved from http://www.ilo.org/surveydata/index.php/catalog/206.

    Central Statistics Office (Industrial Statistics Wing)—Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India (2010–2011). Annual Survey of Industries 2010–2011. Retrieved from http://www.catalog.ihsn.org/index.php/catalog/3438.

  3. Ibid. p. 27.

  4. The equation is MA_Pi = ∑Q2_8_jb*Q2_8_jc (i = 1, 2, 3, 4; j = 1,2,…), where Q2_8_jb represents the destination of Product j and Q2_8_jc is the proportion of Product j in the total production of each enterprise.

References

  • Accetturo, A. 2010. Agglomeration and Growth: The Effects of Commuting Costs. Regional Science 89 (1): 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alakshendra, A. 2019. City Profile: Patna, India. Environment and Urbanization ASIA 10 (2): 374–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R.E., and T. Okubo. 2006. Heterogeneous Firms, Agglomeration and Economic Geography: Spatial Selection and sorting. Journal of Economic Geography 6 (3): 323–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deichmann, U., S.V. Lall, S.J. Redding, and A.J. Venables. 2008. Industrial Location in Developing Countries. World Bank Research Observer 23 (2): 219–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakravorty, S., J. Koo, and S.V. Lall. 2005. Do Localization Economies Matter in Cluster Formation? Questioning the Conventional Wisdom with Data from Indian Metropolises. Environment and Planning A 37 (2): 331–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geurs, K.T., and B. van Wee. 2004. Accessibility Evaluation of Land-Use and Transport Strategies: Review and Research Directions. Journal of Transportation Geography 12 (2004): 127–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghani, E., W.R. Kerr, and S. O’Connell. 2013. Spatial Determinants of Entrepreneurship in India. Regional Studies 48 (6): 1071–1089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E.L., and M.G. Resseger. 2010. The Complementarity Between Cities and Skills. Journal of Regional Science 50 (1): 221–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, G., E.L. Glaeser, and W.R. Kerr. 2010. What Causes Industry Agglomeration? Evidence from Coagglomeration Patterns. American Economic Review 100 (3): 1195–1213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head, K., and T. Mayer. 2004. Market Potential and the Location of Japanese Investment in the European Union. Review of Economics and Statistics 86 (4): 959–972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J.V., and R. Becker. 2000. Political Economy of City Sizes and Formation. Journal of Urban Economics 48 (3): 453–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hummels, D. 2007. Transportation Cost and International Trade in the Second Era of Globalization. Journal of Economic Perspective 21 (2): 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, D.R. 1971. The Concept of Accessibility: A Search for an Operational Form. Regional Studies 5 (2): 101–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, M.-P., A.T. Murray, M.E. O’Kelly, and M. Tiefelsdorf. 2003. Recent Advance in Accessibility Research: Representation, Methodology and Applications. Journal of Geographical System 5: 129–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, N., and M. Cowling. 2012. Place, Sorting Effects and Barriers to Enterprise in Deprived Areas: Different Problems or Different Firms. International Small Business Journal 31 (8): 914–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okubo, T., P.M. Picard, and J.-F. Thisse. 2010. The Spatial Selection of Heterogeneous Firms. Journal of International Economics 82 (2): 230–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puga, D. 1998. Urbanization Patterns: European versus Less Developed Countries. Journal of Regional Science 38 (2): 231–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puga, D. 2010. The Magnitude and Causes of Agglomeration Economies. Journal of Regional Science 50 (1): 203–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, S.S., and W. Strange. 2001. The Determinants of Agglomeration. Journal of Urban Economics 50 (2): 191–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by International Growth Center (Grant # 89115).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abhinav Alakshendra.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alakshendra, A., Li, Z. Local Governments’ Impact on Market Accessibility of Enterprises: Understanding the Location Choices of Enterprises in Hajipur, India. Ind. J. Labour Econ. 63, 119–142 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-020-00206-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41027-020-00206-9

Keywords

Navigation