Early writers on development emphasised the need for a major role for the state in the production process. In underdeveloped countries with subsistence agriculture, weak industrialisation, poor infrastructure, vast underemployment, low income, savings and investment, the need was for a big push in investment. With low savings and poor state of development of markets, there was neither incentive nor ability for the private sector to undertake the investment role. Hence, the need arose for the state to intervene for planned investment in a big way spread not only over industry and infrastructure sectors, but also in transforming subsistence agriculture to higher productivity agriculture by investing in irrigation infrastructure, agricultural Research and development, as also in the agricultural extension services. Thus, in India for instance, at least up to 1991, the public sector, assumed growing importance for providing accelerated growth in core sectors of the economy. These core sectors included railways, power, telecommunications, roads and shipping, and investing though moderately, in the social sectors like education and health. The protagonists for state intervention were pessimistic about the market’s ability to deliver the desired economic change in key sectors, which in their view could be achieved through planned mobilisation and allocation of resources to the public sector.