As a measure of federal institutions, we use first the Regional Authority index (RAI) which ranges from 0 in countries like Iceland, Estonia and Latvia, to over 36 in Belgium and Germany. We argue that economic conditions will have a stronger negative impact on the nationalization of politics when federal institutions give way to a regionalized frame of party competition, and when organizational bonds between national and regional copartisans are looser. These two mechanisms will be more likely to unfold when federal arrangements provide significant autonomy to regional policy makers. To capture this specific dimension, two other variables measure more specifically the authority exercised by the regional government over those who live in the region (self-rule) and the extent to which regional governments are autonomous rather than deconcentrated (institutional depth). The self-rule index ranges from 0 in similar countries to over 22 in United States, Belgium, and Germany, and the institutional depth index ranges from 0 to around 5.5 in Germany and around 5 in Belgium and Italy. All three variables are taken from Hooghe et al. (2008).
Adopting a legal framework that primarily entails registering cross-ethnic coalitions would likely encourage coalitions to become something more than just a gentlemen’s agreement. In addition to registration thresholds, the political laws may include an electoral threshold, where only registered, qualifying coalitions can win offices in national elections. As indicated earlier, electoral thresholds generate more incentives than registration thresholds. Electoral thresholds may be based on the performance of coalitions in the past elections to promote their sustainability as well as based on their distribution of offices, votes, candidates, or seats across provinces to promote their inclusiveness. These measures have popularly been used in some countries to encourage nationalization of parties. In many countries, the law requires registration of parties before every election, although in those countries the electoral commission rather than a government body is responsible for registration and monitoring parties. 150
Priority sector was regarded as a “People Sector” by policymakers, regulators and banks till 1990. As one of the prime objectives of nationalization of banks was radical development of the society in general and ‘certain sectors’ in particular, credit flow to these sectors was ensured. This directed lending did not come without a cost. While granting credit to these sectors, institutional viability was neglected, low interest rates were charged. This resulted in huge over dues from priority sector. The recommendations of the Narsimham Committee were not accepted in-toto especially to reduce the mandatory 40% lending norm to the priority sector to 10% level. TABLE- 4 shows Sector wise NPAs in the State Bank of India. Regarding Farm loans, all the commercial, Co-operative and Rural banks have mandate of loan conversion. State Bank of India is strictly adhering to the mandate; farmers can get conversion up to 3 times.
History and Significance of Rural Banking in India : With the nationalization of banks in 1969 and 1980, establishment of Regional Rural Banks in 1975 and National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development in 1982 by the Government of India, the policies evolved by the RBI laid a strong foundation for establishing “Rural Banking System” The Government of India set up Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) on October 2, 1975. Initially, five RRBs were set up on October 2, 1975 which was sponsored by Syndicate Bank, State Bank of India, Punjab National Bank, United Commercial Bank and United Bank of India. RRBs were originally conceived as low cost institutions having a rural ethos, local feel and pro poor focus. SBI has 30 Regional Rural Banks in India known as RRBs. The rural banks of SBI are spread in 13 states extending from Kashmir to Karnataka and Himachal Pradesh to North East. The total number of SBIs Regional Rural Banks in India branches is 2349 (16%). Till date in rural banking in India, there are 14,475 rural banks in the country of which 2126 (91%) are located in remote rural areas. Apart from SBI, there are other few banks which functions for the development of the rural areas in India.
By the 1960s, All Banks except the State Bank of India (SBI) were owned and controlled by private persons, though they are under the regulations of the Reserve Bank of India. With more than 85% of total deposits with these banks, Indian banking industry was a significant tool to smooth the progress of the development of the Indian economy and it had emerged to be a great employer, what's more a debate started about the nationalization of the banking industry in India. In a paper entitled "Stray thoughts on Bank Nationalization” then Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, in ‘All India Congress Meeting’ expressed the plan of the Government as to nationalization of Indian banking sectors. Thereafter, the Government of India issued an ordinance in the year 1969 and nationalised the 14 largest commercial banks.
Finally, a fourth potential issue has to do with the direction of causality since there might be a reverse relationship between nationalization and party organiza- tion. We do not exclude this possibility and we believe that this relationship requires further exploration in a longitudinal study. To provide a first exploration of this issue we have collected additional data on party nationalization for the election year prior to 2007 (the year for which we have party organization data) and we have run a few models with our party organizational measures as dependent variables. In most models party nationalization is not significant, which lends less support to the hypothesis of a different causal story. The only exception is the model in which leadership factionalism is the dependent variable: party nationalization appears to discourage leadership factionalism. This is not surprising since successful national- ization means a successful coordination across districts which should increase the prestige and power of party leadership inside the party rather than diminish it. 31 The issue of reverse causation however requires further elaboration and investiga- tion in a longitudinal study. What we can claim in our paper is that there is a clear a strong relationship between the organizational features of political parties and their nationalization of electoral support. Further research should disentangle
nationalization, carried out in response to the 1971 conference decision, became enmeshed with work on the much more ambitious AES, which aimed to revitalize the British economy through partial nationalization of the manufacturing sector. As the Labour Party’s elaborate proposals suggest, milking finance to nourish industry was no mere dalliance or flight of fancy; the party’s economic thinkers were in earnest. Furthermore, they were inclined to believe that, in at least some respects, financialization offered an opportunity rather than a threat. By bringing this dynamic to light, the essay strengthens underdeveloped themes in the extant literature. We extend the analysis of Wickham-Jones who does not have room to explore the fine-grained detail of Labour’s policies towards the financial sector in the 1970s. 8 Whereas George
The Reserve Bank of India as the national bank of our nation was built up on first April, 1935 under Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The Bank was begun initially as an investor bank and its paid capital was Rs. 5 crore. The bank assumed control over the capacity of cash issue from the then Imperial Bank of India. The bank was nationalized in the year 1948 not long after freedom, following a post war pattern towards nationalization of Central Bank everywhere throughout the world. The Bank of England was nationalized in 1946. Besides, a midway administrated framework had then gotten important to control runaway expansion seething in India since 1939, focal swelling in the nation adequately. Thirdly, as India had the set out upon the program me of economic development and development. It was important to have an unlimited oversight over exercises of banking to the Central Bank could be utilized adequately as an instrument of economic change.
Still, it is difficult to assert solitary reasons for shift in voter preferences. Politics is a complicated affair which relies on perceptions and vagaries. As hard as scholars have tried to fit voters’ intentions and actions into a neat framework of ranked preferences and clear desires, politics will not comply. Voters rely on a complex matrix of values, needs, and opinions to vote as they do, and any attempt to simplify their intentions will necessarily meet with contradiction. In the case of 1979, general economic malaise was a major problem in voters’ eyes. Of these issues, though, high taxes, trade union power run amok, and excessive nationalization of industry represented the most acute of Britain’s problems, and account for the massive change in British politics which occurred in 1979.
Nationalization in Kazakhstan was conducted, but not as much as in other foreign countries. This process encompassed strategically important industries, for example, energy and oil and gas industry. During the privatization these objects were sold from despair and for a few percent of their real value: the state could not cope with either management or development of the field, and as you know, these industries are distinguished by very expensive fixed assets. The main mechanism for the return of property was amendments to the legislation on taxes, on subsoil and subsoil use, on the environment. These include: the right of the state to the half the share in each new project and on secondary markets, the prohibition of reselling subsoil use licenses for 2 years, the mandatory requirement to develop "Kazakhstan content", as well as the use of the national security factor as a reason for refusal to grant a license for subsoil use. For example, one of the first steps of Kazakhstan on the return of energy assets was the nationalization of the uranium industry in 1997.
government that came to power in July 1945. Between 1945 and 1950, it ‘was responsible for nationalising the Bank of England, coal mining, electricity and gas, the whole railway system and a section of road transport, civil aviation and telecommunications, and finally, though ineffectually, the major part of the iron and steel industry.’ 62 Nationalization statutes were passed in 1946, 1947, and 1948, with little political or public opposition; 63 the only real opposition occurred in relation to the Iron and Steel Bill as ‘the industry, unlike coal or the railways, was profitable; for another, it had a tradition of good public relations, and its trade union leaders were themselves understood to be lukewarm about public ownership.’ 64 Nationalization of iron and steel was first proposed in 1946 by John Wilmot, Minister of Supply, 65 but was met with considerable controversy and opposition. It was suggested that ‘in order to “retain the willing co-operation of the industry”, the Government should not nationalise but should impose a “permanent statutory control”.’ 66 Such a compromise was favoured by both Wilmot and Morrison, who as Deputy Prime Minister in the Labour
This research study is based on nationalization and de-nationalization of banking industry of Pakistan. The first program of nationalization that was taken into functioning in the new Pakistan, from the time of independence of Pakistan, the economic and institutional development was suspended due to continue autocratic and dictatorship ruling in the country. Continue military rule indulged country into war with neighbor country India, two wars were
3. Measures taken by Lang Jingshan to Promote the Nationalization of Photography For the art of photography in the West, Chinese intellectuals did not abandon it, but used positive actions to use Western technology to rectify the Chinese nation and enhance national self-confidence. The two most important figures are Mr. Lang Jingshan and Mr. Chen Wanli, both of whom led the development of Chinese photographic art in the early 20th century in the South and the North. For the first time, Mr. Chen Wanli put forward his own photographic viewpoint--“Expressing the color of Chinese art and exerting the characteristics of Chinese art”. At this time, the most important practical topic of Chinese photographers is to give photography to national characteristics and express the national beauty of photography. It is also expressed in the art forms of association, teaching, starting classes, running journals, exhibitions, and submissions.