ESTIMATES OF DISTRICT DOMESTIC PRODUCT OF ... - Uttarakhand · Report as on 30 Nov. 2019 ESTIMATES...

Report as on 30 Nov. 2019

ESTIMATES OF DISTRICT DOMESTIC PRODUCT

OF UTTARAKHAND

(2011-12 TO 2017-18 WITH BASE YEAR, 2011-12)

Government of Uttarakhand

DIRECTORATE OF ECONOMICS & STATISTICS Department of Planning

GOVERNMENT OF UTTARAKHAND 110000//66 NNeesshhvviillllaa RRooaadd,, DDeehhrraadduunn ((UUttttaarraakkhhaanndd)) –– 224488000011

TTeelleeffaaxx:: 00113355--22771122660044 WWeebbssiittee:: hhttttpp::////ddeess..uukk..ggoovv..iinn//,, EE--mmaaiill:: ddiirrddeessuukk@@ggmmaaiill..ccoomm

AcknowledRement

Directorate of Economics & statistics (DES) regularly comes out with

statistics that is helpful for various policy makers. Various authorities and

research institution often require data on economic activities at the district

level for planning and policy purpose' In this context, I am pleased to note that

the Directorate of Economics & Statistiis (DES) has come out with its yet

another valuable publication "Estimates of District Domestic product of

Utta ra kh a nd : 20 11- !2 to 2O!7 -L8" with base y ear 201.1-12. "

lncome of the District is considered one of the most important

indicator/barometer to measure the economic growth/development of a

district vis-)-vis others. Preparation of District lncome estimates has recently

gained importance, since it is one of three indicators to construct a composite

Human Development lndex (HDl) of the state. The present publication covers

the district-wise gross and net income estimates along with per capita income

both at current and constant prices.

Special thanks are extended to Shri Sushil Kumar, Director, DES for

providing his valuable guidance and direction in formulation this publication to

the DES. I would also like to place on record my deep and sincere appreciation

for the efforts of officers and staff of the DES engaged in preparation of this

document

I hope this publication wilt immensely help the policy makers,

development administrators, planners and academic & research community.

Date o6fozf z.,ztPlace : Dehradun

Government of Uttara kha nd

Amit'Singh Negi)

Sd6retary Planning

v

'I'fie 73rd an.[ 7,ttfi amencfntents of tfie Infian Constitution, wfiicli 6rougftt focaf[e'ue[ governance in.to prominence, in turn focusef attention on regionaf pro6hm.s andpknning. Airectorate of lEconomics s{, Stati^stics 6iannuoff1 refease tfie state income

esthnates. 'y'fowe'uer in tlie state cfomestic profuct estimates attentiott [ta[ 6een cotyfin.cd

to tlie state as a wfiofe anf notfii.ng fiaf mentionef a6out tfie regionaf fffirences witftilttfie state. l,litfi tfie growing intportance { fecentrafizef pknnitry, tfte nee[ to f,ertefop

re fet,ant infomtation on inficators { feaefopntent as fistict- fettef ftas 6een i.ncreasingtl

feft. for proper pfonning ;for regiortaf deoefopment, it i.s essentiaf to fiduc a prior{nowfefge { tfte fevef { peyformdnce on regionaf 6asis. tfie estimates of district incorue

o'r tfie net fistict profuct can 6e foofo[ upon as an hrficator to nteasurc econonicfeve[opmertt and'weffore of a region.'ffiese estimates witt [efinitef1 tfu'oru sonrc figfit on.

tfie inter-fistrict aari^ation in economic feuetopment.(Tfie current pu1fication of AcDA comprises of estimatesfor yar 2011-12 to 2012-

18 on 6ase lear 2011-12.'flie concepts &, definition are simifar to tfre state itrconrc

estimates an.d are aaaifa\fe on lut' state income estimates pu6ficdtion.. ,fliis 1su.1ficatiott

fias tliree cftapters in tfie focuruent - Q),r,aecutiue Summal) on DOp aggrcgates, (II),46out estimatiort { OOQ an[ (ttt) District wise QQ11\e an[ IVDDA fottowed fu 6tta6[es. 'ffie a1sofute fata are avaifa\[e tlirougfi tftese ta6[es, fio,wever user can corue up

witfi manl f,erh.,athtes ta6fe tlirougfr tfiese a|sofute fota. E,feoenfigures are afso adfett

for grapfticaf/ pictoriaf representation of fatd.I wouff [i?g to put on recorcfs m) wdml accofafes for tfte strcnuous {, efiensiue

ffirts ma[e 61 tfie smattteam of cAES ffict"afs wfio mafe tfiis pu1tication apaita1teforappraisat, comment an[ suggestion fu tfre entigfrten reafers, researcfier, pofic1 ma|grs,

p fanners to furt fr er improv e our future pu6 fic ation.

I frearti$ an[ warmf1 tfran|, S liri Amit Sr"gfr Negi Secretary cptanntng, for giatngus opportunitl to wor|-in tfrisfiet[ anfrecognizing our con

Q)ate :

Qface:

ee f ozfz*.toAefirafun

tri6ution.

Qreface

-

*-oreword

(Directorate af Economics and'statistics fias co?ne out witfr tfie newe{ition af Aisffict [omestic product estimates 2017-18. {Estimatinn ofcDistrict (Domestic ?ro[uct ((DOA) is currentfy rnade on'income o'iginatingapproacfi as use[for compifatnn of state inro*u estimates. For fravingaccurate (ND(P estimates tremeru{o'us aruaunt of information ruoufd needto 6e rcffectef a.nd compi{er{ at tfre r[istrict as woff as state fevets. Ifiougfithe QSA(P estirnates are 6etng rc{*ase{ taice o Jear 11n tfre montfrs ofFeilruray an[ flugust resvecti'vefi), ltfre ctW? cstirnates are not 6eing

re{eased learh as rveff' \eaause of u*,tavai{a6ifit;; *f {lsagregate {eve{ c{ata.

'Vl)ith tfre pre.;tnt avaihbi{i,ry of data at {istrir:i. tevet it .wouffi ruot 6e

pcssiife to compite tfre Cistrkt lsr;{:{ estim.ate on yearfy 6asis, 'Witfr tftegru{ua{ improvement in tfre avai{abifiry oJ 6asic fata o.uer tlie years, acomprefrensit;e re'aiew of m.etfro[o{ogfor natilma.{ a.ccounts statistics fras

constantfy 6een undertaf,gt witfl a view to wp[ating tfre fata\ase andsfriying tfre 6ase year to a ruore recent year.

tfrougfr tfie cUES is u.ring tfre set metfiodofogy of (DOQ prepdrationpercofate[ b CSO, aru[ fu una.uaifafiifit1 of c{kagrregated data, (NXP

estimates merefy reffects tfie i"fea af toca{ eco?towt}. It is a we[[ provo?gdtfrougfit tfrat tfie data is tfre hacfi$ane af pfanntng anf even tfre states(DflS an[ ruatioruaf statisticaf organisatioru are raar?jng ofl a visi.on"Aatuifor CIwetopment" 6u.t stilT tirne$ avaifii\ifit1 witfr re[i"a6k [ata"isa 6U cNiaffenge, Aatu non avai{a|if.ry at [istrict kvef particu{arfi tfresecon[ary and tertiary sector fata is tfre fimita.tions to refease tfiis issue|ur sorne frora using a$in[ia rates and ratias sfrorvs tfie trend of economlin tfie State.

ryES fras trief to come out'witfr tfie ro*ust estimates of aOSre wit{ttlie fimitation of using atfinfia rntes anf ratia.r on rnost af tfre componentof secondory and tertiary sector w,fiicfi migfit 6e sorne frow ruot a goodpractice and sfo,wb *t are {eaetopdng Stfre IIe and CAI tfrerefore tfrene4 issue ,rf AOQ sfraf{[wefop rsrc tfi.ese fines.

Foying tfre cfraffenge to generate tfre {isagregated r{ata AES finattl 6ringou.t tfre (UDe fuport 2017^18" I congrat'ufate fuk Sllaneesfr futna,r.Deputy Airector an[ his .snmfftearn ca.npriring ,f %r. A,Ajesfr liwnar{Ec:onomic arl{,gtatktirs A;f;cer, fuf_r. .Se S'ing$, A{SO, 9Tt.r, Qoy[ lvtr^r\1tesfr I{umar , d{Lfr$O to cornp{ete tfre ta.r{at^tng witfi t"n;::ff:

_, '

\:

-2-on otfrer important Statisticafr.tenture. I fiearti$ give m1 tfiank; to SriAmit Singfi 9\regi Secretary Qtanning wfro fias inspiref and guile[ us on[ffirent statisticaf actipities an[particukrty tfre cDAQ estimates. I afsotfran{to SriSusfiitl(umar,airectorcuEs wfro afway support tfie teamto c on[uct an) s tatitis tic a I p enture. S ug g e stions from p tt s ta f,g fr o f[erswouffi give us insigfit to improve tfre cNDcp infuture.

1 ,,. l .

'y' \-\,' ..-

(aq%anoj Kuma{aant)loint Airector

Research Team

1. Dr. Manoj Kr. Pant

2. Shri Maneesh Rana

3. Shri Rajesh Kumar

4. Shri Ritesh Kumar

5. Shri Suresh Goel

6. Shri Shwetank P. Singh

7. Shri Atul Anand

8. Shri Harish Lakhera

Joint Director

Deputy Director

Economics & Statistical Officer

Additional Statistical Officer




Data Entry Operator

Executive Summary on District Domestic Product (DDP)

DDP estimates are very useful indicator of economic development & provide the fair idea of regional differences within the state. This release of DDP estimate is based on base year 2011-12. This publication presents the DDP estimate from 2011-12 to 2017-18PE. In terms of size of the economy, Haridwar is the largest economy for year 2017-18PE with a size of Rs. 6757353 lakh & district Rudraprayag is the smallest with a size of Rs. 271316 lakh. The PCI is highest for Haridwar district i.e. Rs. 293078 & lowest for Rudraprayag district i.e Rs. 88987 for year 2017-18PE. The district having highest growth rate in year 2017-18PE is Udham Singh Nagar with the growth rate of 10.29 percent & least growing district is Nainital with the growth rate of 5.54 percent.

District wise salient feature of the estimates are as follows: -

1. Uttarkashi

The size of the economy i.e. DDP at Current Prices is estimated as Rs 227097 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 404901 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, the size of the economy decreases from 11.27% in year 2012-13 to 10.88% in the year 2017-18PE.

In terms of Constant Prices, the size of the economy i.e. DDP is estimated as Rs 227097 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 325050 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, DDP at constant price i.e. economy registered growth of -1.37% in year 2012-13 & 6.53% in the year 2017-18PE.

Per capita income is estimated Rs 61471 in year 2011-12 whereas it is provisionally estimated Rs 98100 for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth with respect to previous year comparison, per capita NDDP at current price or per capita income decreases by 9.65% in year 2012-13 to 8.14% in the year 2017-18PE.

2. Chamoli


In terms of Constant Prices, the size of the economy i.e. DDP is estimated as Rs 355948 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 501629 lakh for the

year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, DDP at constant price i.e. economy registered growth of 4.16% in year 2012-13 & 7.60% in the year 2017-18PE.


3. Rudrapryag


In terms of Constant Prices, the size of the economy i.e. DDP is estimated as Rs 141896 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 217824 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, DDP at constant price i.e. economy registered growth of 7.97% in year 2012-13 & 7.32% in the year 2017-18PE.


4. Tehri Garhwal


In terms of Constant Prices, the size of the economy i.e. DDP is estimated as Rs 390458 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 596563 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, DDP at constant price i.e. economy registered growth of 6.24% in year 2012-13 & 7.89% in the year 2017-18PE.

Per capita income is estimated Rs 54877 in year 2011-12 whereas it is provisionally estimated Rs 93444 for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth with respect to previous year comparison, per capita NDDP at current price or

per capita income decreases by 14.32% in year 2012-13 to 10.86% in the year 2017-18PE.

5. Dehradun

The size of the economy i.e. DDP at Current Prices is estimated Rs 2221193 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 4512789 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, the size of the economy increases from 13.53% in year 2012-13 to 13.95% in the year 2017-18PE.

In terms of Constant Prices, the size of the economy i.e. DDP is estimated Rs 2221193 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 3662005 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, DDP at constant price i.e. economy registered growth of 6.85% in year 2012-13 & 6.09% in the year 2017-18PE.

Per capita income is estimated Rs 114020 in year 2011-12 whereas it is provisionally estimated Rs 215064 for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth with respect to previous year comparison, per capita NDDP at current price or per capita income increases by 12.13% in year 2012-13 to 12.47% in the year 2017-18PE.

6. Pauri Garhwal

The size of the economy i.e. DDP at Current Prices is estimated Rs 487979 lakh in year 2011-12 & is provisionally estimated Rs 936701 lakh for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage growth, the size of the economy decreases from 12.48% in year 2012-13 to 11.34% in the year 2017-18PE.



7. Haridwar




8. Pithoragarh




9. Bageshwar




10. Almora




11. Champawat



Per capita income is estimated Rs 59600 in year 2011-12 whereas it is provisionally estimated Rs 100646 for the year 2017-18PE. In terms of percentage

growth with respect to previous year comparison, per capita NDDP at current price or per capita income decreases by 21.38% in year 2012-13 to 10.36% in the year 2017-18PE.

12. Nainital




13. U.S. Nagar




I: About Estimation of District Domestic Product

(A) The DDP or District Income The estimates of District Domestic Product (DDP), generally known as

District Income, are considered as the most important indicator to measure

the economic development of the District. The DDP of a District is defined as

the aggregate money value of all goods and services produced within the

geographical boundary of the District, counted without duplication with

reference to a specific time period, usually a year. As DDP reflects the

production capacity of any District, it simultaneously reflects outcomes of

investments made, opportunities available and the likely impact of various

economic policies. Thus, in the context of planned development of the

economy of a District, the estimates of District domestic product and its

derivative, per capita income plays a vital role since these estimates help

government in formulating the policies and programs based on the output of

different economic activities.

The broader utilities of the DDP estimates are as follows:

1. To know the growth of the economy

2. To workout per capita income

3. For allocation of funds

4. To study structural changes in economy

5. For fixing the plan targets

6. To study the Inter-District comparison

(B) Sectors of Economy In order to estimate the DDP or District Income, the whole economy

of a District is divided into 3 major sectors comprised of 13 sub-

sectors/economic activities as follows:

1-Primary Sector (i) Crops (including horticulture)

(ii) Livestock

(iii) Forestry and Logging

(iv) Fishing

(v) Mining and Quarrying

2-Secondary Sector (vi) Manufacturing

(vii) Construction

(viii) Electricity, Gas and Water Supply

3-Tertiary Sector (viii) Transport, Storage Communication & services related to

broadcasting

(a) Railway

(b)Transport by other means other than railways

(c) Storage

(d) Communication and services related to broadcasting

(ix)Trade, Repair, Hotels and Restaurants

(x) Financial services

(xi) Real Estate, Ownership of Dwelling and professional services

(xii) Public Administration

(xiii) Other Services

(C) The Estimation Approaches

(1) Primary Sector- Production approach has been applied to derive the

estimates of primary sector. In this method, the sum of economic values of

all goods & services produced within the state boundary during the year is

appropriately adjusted for the inputs consumed in the process of production

I.e., production is calculated as has the algebraic sum of outputs (+) and

inputs (-). Districts wise production of Crops, Livestock, Forest, and Fishing

& Mining is collected from respected Directorate of Departments.

(2) Secondary & Tertiary Sector- Industry wise & district wise workforce

estimation is derived from the economic census 2012 data. These workforce

estimates are segregated on the basis of National Industrial Classification

2008. The workforce estimates are used to derive the gross value added of

different economic activity under secondary and tertiary sector. However, in

case of public administration the gross value added is divided among the

district based on the workforce data of base year made available by the

State Treasury Directorate. Taxes are estimated on the basis of sales tax

revenue data provided by the concerned department.

(D) Current and Constant Price Estimates An analyst may be interested to analyze the State Income or SDP

estimates in two ways:

• The actual increase in value terms i.e., the estimates of current output

at current prices

• The increase in output i.e., the estimates of current output at constant

prices (base year price)

Whereas, the first estimate helps in analyzing the overall impact of increase

in price and increase in the quantity, the second estimate is used to analyze

the increase in quantity terms, when the price effects are eliminated.

(E) Per Capita Income (PCI) The estimates of aggregated NDDP (at current and constant prices) so

arrived at is divided by mid-year (financial) population to get Per Capita

Income (PCI) i.e.,

PCI = NDDP / Mid-year Population

(F) Three Principal Figures Most of the users of get puzzled with set of estimates floated before them

and find it difficult to select the appropriate one. It is for their ease to

concentrate on following three estimates:

(a) GDDP at current prices (Size of the District Economy)

(b) GDDP at constant prices (Reflect Growth Rate of the District)

(c) NDDP at current prices (Per Capita Income of the District)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE

1 Uttarkashi 227097 252692 297209 305338 331328 365169 4049012 Chamoli 355948 403990 464770 486538 504592 555575 6236903 Rudraprayag 141896 175789 208205 208429 220189 242099 2713164 T Garhwal 390458 453375 518437 534441 600276 658318 7405075 Dehradun 2221193 2521800 2863184 3232306 3569717 3960460 45127896 P Garhwal 487979 548866 636822 685370 759831 841297 9367017 Haridwar 3541395 4034601 4521113 4851472 5308962 5880854 67573538 Pithoragarh 361053 411412 500499 507004 564614 624262 6976699 Bageshwar 190179 218960 253017 275059 289633 324200 365969

10 Almora 428018 490303 563108 558426 632009 691827 76743111 Champawat 172379 213267 260132 247927 261063 282496 32080512 Nainital 742018 843164 978305 1129307 1172363 1285261 144608013 U.S.Nagar 2273148 2593068 2842634 3122269 3437935 3790235 4445715

11532758 13161286 14907436 16143888 17716301 19512484 22283604RE - Revised Estimates, PE - Provisional Estimates

New Series Estimates, Base Year 2011-12.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





Table- A : Districtwise Domestic Product (at Current Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

Table- B : Districtwise Domestic Product (at Constant Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





S.No.

Table- C : Net District Domestic Product (at Current Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

Uttarakhand

Table- D : Net District Domestic Product (at Constant Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





S.No.

Table- E : Districtwise Domestic Product of Primary Sector (at Current Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

Uttarakhand

Table- F : Districtwise Domestic Product of Primary Sector (at Constant Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





S.No.

Table- G : Districtwise Domestic Product of Secondary Sector (at Current Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

Uttarakhand

Table- H : Districtwise Domestic Product of Secondary Sector (at Constant Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





S.No.

Table- I : Districtwise Domestic Product of Tertiary Sector (at Current Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

Uttarakhand

Table- J : Districtwise Domestic Product of Tertiary Sector (at Constant Prices)

(in Lakh Rs.)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

Primary Secondary Tertiary Primary Secondary Tertiary1 Uttarkashi 31.23 24.35 44.42 20.97 24.27 54.752 Chamoli 26.44 32.32 41.24 15.82 32.54 51.633 Rudraprayag 20.95 24.78 54.27 14.22 22.73 63.054 T Garhwal 20.87 35.04 44.09 16.13 32.27 51.605 Dehradun 11.85 41.12 47.02 10.01 38.49 51.506 P Garhwal 18.86 29.25 51.89 14.05 26.93 59.027 Haridwar 7.17 72.08 20.75 5.86 69.94 24.218 Pithoragarh 22.28 34.06 43.65 18.83 31.36 49.819 Bageshwar 22.85 21.59 55.56 17.22 19.78 63.00

10 Almora 30.93 33.00 36.08 22.64 32.74 44.6111 Champawat 23.65 32.52 43.83 17.67 30.99 51.3412 Nainital 20.79 29.96 49.25 15.73 28.04 56.2313 U.S.Nagar 11.35 65.76 22.89 9.13 63.72 27.15

14.00 52.13 33.88 10.82 49.90 39.28RE - Revised Estimates, PE - Provisional Estimates


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE

1 Uttarkashi -1.37 12.93 4.27 7.78 7.34 6.532 Chamoli 4.16 9.34 3.53 2.50 8.38 7.603 Rudraprayag 7.97 14.64 2.94 4.20 7.74 7.324 T Garhwal 6.24 12.06 1.53 8.83 7.66 7.895 Dehradun 6.85 8.20 7.72 10.50 12.93 6.096 P Garhwal 3.48 10.34 6.12 9.53 8.39 6.337 Haridwar 8.86 7.27 3.69 8.60 9.98 8.888 Pithoragarh 4.12 16.23 0.51 9.69 8.40 7.089 Bageshwar 1.34 11.37 9.48 4.53 7.93 7.69

10 Almora 7.09 10.42 -3.51 11.05 7.42 6.5811 Champawat 8.17 18.45 -3.37 4.14 6.37 8.3712 Nainital 6.02 10.80 14.71 0.21 7.17 5.5413 U.S.Nagar 8.87 5.42 6.19 8.53 9.20 10.29

7.27 8.47 5.29 8.08 9.83 7.84RE - Revised Estimates, PE - Provisional Estimates


S.No. District 2011-12 2017-18 PE

Table- K : Sectorwise Percentage Distribution in Total DDP(at Current Prices)

(in %)

Uttarakhand

Table- L : Districtwise Yearly Growth Rate in DDP (at Constant Prices)

(in %)

S.No.

Uttarakhand

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8District 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 RE 2016-17RE 2017-18PE





Uttarakhand

Table- M : Districtwise Per Capita Income

(in Rs.)

S.No.

6757353

4512789

4445715

1446080

936701

767431

740507

697669

623690

404901

365969

320805

271316

0 1000000 2000000 3000000 4000000 5000000 6000000 7000000

Haridwar

Dehradun

U.S.Nagar

Nainital

P Garhwal

Almora

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Chamoli

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Champawat

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 1 : District Domestic Product 2017-18

(at Current Prices)

5576709

3662005

3621508

1133290

746442

620890

596563

559188

501629

325050

285498

256214

217824

0 1000000 2000000 3000000 4000000 5000000 6000000

Haridwar

Dehradun

U.S.Nagar

Nainital

P Garhwal

Almora

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Chamoli

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Champawat

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 2: District Domestic Product 2017-18

(at Constant Prices)

6153194

4050152

4032539

1291049

826105

673754

644189

615003

544700

356743

318251

284173

237989

0 1000000 2000000 3000000 4000000 5000000 6000000 7000000

Haridwar

Dehradun

U.S.Nagar

Nainital

P Garhwal

Almora

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Chamoli

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Champawat

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 3: Net District Domestic Product 2017-18

(at Current Prices)

5060075

3278842

3266654

1012658

659858

548159

517941

494679

443027

287699

248221

227335

191163

0 1000000 2000000 3000000 4000000 5000000 6000000

Haridwar

U.S.Nagar

Dehradun

Nainital

P Garhwal

Almora

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Chamoli

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Champawat

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 4: Net District Domestic Product 2017-18

(at Constant Prices)

10.29

8.88

8.37

7.89

7.84

7.69

7.60

7.32

7.08

6.58

6.53

6.33

6.09

5.54

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00

U.S.Nagar

Haridwar

Champawat

T Garhwal

Uttarakhand

Bageshwar

Chamoli

Rudraprayag

Pithoragarh

Almora

Uttarkashi

P Garhwal

Dehradun

Nainital

Growth Rate in %

Dis

tric

t Graph 5: Districtwise Growth Rate 2017-18

(at Constant Price)

293078

220429

215064

182320

127450

124920

124920

122161

113031

112350

100646

98100

93444

88987

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000

Haridwar

U.S.Nagar

Dehradun

Uttarakhand

Chamoli

P Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Nainital

Bageshwar

Almora

Champawat

Uttarkashi

T Garhwal

Rudraprayag

In Rs.

Graph 6: Districtwise Per Capita Income 2017-18 (at Current Prices)

20.97

15.82

14.22

16.13

10.01

14.05

5.86

18.83

17.22

22.64

17.67

15.73

9.13

24.27

32.54

22.73

32.27

38.49

26.93

69.94

31.36

19.78

32.74

30.99

28.04

63.72

54.75

51.63

63.05

51.60

51.50

59.02

24.21

49.81

63.00

44.61

51.34

56.23

27.15

0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 100.00

Uttarkashi

Chamoli

Rudraprayag

T Garhwal

Dehradun

P Garhwal

Haridwar

Pithoragarh

Bageshwar

Almora

Champawat

Nainital

U.S.Nagar

Dis

tric

t Graph 7: Sectorwise Percentage Distribution in Total DDP

2017-18 (at Current Prices)

Primary Secondary Tertiary

369127

355900

356017

206466

171343

130190

129203

118632

98122

84302

62492

56288

38189

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000

Dehradun

U.S.Nagar

Haridwar

Nainital

Almora

Pithoragarh

P Garhwal

T Garhwal

Chamoli

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Champawat

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 8: DDP of Primary Sector 2017-18

(at Current Prices)

4251543

2484234

1419025

368118

247768

247666

237291

216800

201804

98722

97557

71776

61032

0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000 2500000 3000000 3500000 4000000 4500000

Haridwar

U.S.Nagar

Dehradun

Nainital

Almora

P Garhwal

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Chamoli

Champawat

Uttarkashi

Bageshwar

Rudraprayag

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 9: DDP of Secondary Sector 2017-18

(at Current Prices)

1899008

1471592

1058452

738116

542694

379492

344382

337596

320161

228573

220072

169324

163537

0 500000 1000000 1500000 2000000

Dehradun

Haridwar

U.S.Nagar

Nainital

P Garhwal

T Garhwal

Pithoragarh

Almora

Chamoli

Bageshwar

Uttarkashi

Rudraprayag

Champawat

(in Lakh Rs.)

Dis

tric

t Graph 10: DDP of Tertiary Sector 2017-18

(at Current Prices)

Haridwar, 6757353, 30%

Dehradun, 4512789, 20%

U.S.Nagar, 4445715, 20%

Nainital , 1446080, 7%

P Garhwal, 936701, 4%

Almora, 767431, 4%

T Garhwal, 740507, 3%

Pithoragarh, 697669, 3%

Chamoli, 623690, 3%

Uttarkashi, 404901, 2%

Bageshwar, 365969, 2%

Champawat, 320805, 1%

Rudraprayag, 271316, 1%

Graph 11: District Domestic Product 2017-18 (At Current Prices )

ESTIMATES OF DISTRICT DOMESTIC PRODUCT OF ... - Uttarakhand · Report as on 30 Nov. 2019 ESTIMATES...

Documents

Transcript of ESTIMATES OF DISTRICT DOMESTIC PRODUCT OF ... - Uttarakhand · Report as on 30 Nov. 2019 ESTIMATES...