Despite the setback caused by the United States’ unfair tariff measures, India is pursuing trade agreements with other partners, including the European Union. Such agreements will deliver results only if India is prepared to seize the opportunities they create. I believe in this preparation, states have an important role to play—and that studies like NITI Aayog’s Export Preparedness Index (EPI) 2024, despite limitations, can help point the way.
On January 14, 2026, NITI Aayog released the Export Preparedness Index (EPI) 2024, which evaluates the export readiness of Indian States and Union Territories and underscores their pivotal role in achieving India’s USD 1 trillion merchandise export target by 2030 and the broader vision of Viksit Bharat @2047.
The EPI provides a detailed assessment of 17 ‘Large States’ and other States and Union Territories. For meaningful comparison, States and UTs are grouped into large states, Small States, North-eastern States, and Union Territories, and further classified within each group as Leaders (high preparedness), Challengers (moderate preparedness with scope for improvement), and Aspirers (early-stage export development). This classification framework promotes targeted reforms and facilitates peer-based policy learning among States and Union Territories.
As per the EPI 2024 rankings, the top-performing large States are Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh. Among the small States, North Eastern States, and Union Territories, the leading performers are Uttarakhand, Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, and Goa.
What is EPI 2024?
The EPI is a comprehensive composite index developed and released by NITI Aayog to evaluate the extent to which Indian States and Union Territories (UTs) are equipped to participate effectively in international trade and promote exports. The Index goes beyond a narrow assessment of export performance or volumes and instead examines the overall export ecosystem in each State and UT. This includes an assessment of physical and logistics infrastructure, policy and regulatory frameworks, institutional mechanisms, and the broader business and investment environment that collectively enable export competitiveness.
The primary objectives of the Index are to assess the robustness, resilience, and inclusiveness of sub-national export ecosystems; to identify structural constraints, systemic bottlenecks, and key growth drivers at both the State and district levels; to encourage competitive federalism and facilitate peer learning by enabling States and UTs to benchmark their performance against one another; and to operationalise national trade and export promotion goals by translating them into region-specific, place-based export strategies that reflect local strengths and comparative advantages.
The structure of the Index comprises four core pillars, elaborated through thirteen sub-pillars and seventy thoughtfully selected indicators, facilitating a granular, multidimensional, and policy-relevant analysis of subnational export ecosystems. The index assesses preparedness across four key pillars—business ecosystem, export infrastructure, policy and governance, and export performance—drawing on a comprehensive set of indicators, including MSME depth, logistics efficiency, regulatory capacity, and export diversification.
Export Infrastructure assesses the adequacy and efficiency of trade, logistics, connectivity, utilities, and industrial infrastructure—such as ports, transport networks, digital systems, industrial parks, SEZs, and manufacturing clusters—that enable export activity. Business Ecosystem, the highest-weighted pillar, evaluates the economic and institutional environment for exporters, covering macroeconomic stability, cost competitiveness, human capital, access to finance, MSME strength, and the broader industrial and innovation landscape.
Policy and Governance examine State-level export policies, regulatory quality, institutional coordination, ease of doing business, and trade facilitation mechanisms, including export promotion agencies and single-window systems. Export Performance measures actual export outcomes, growth, and diversification across products and markets, as well as global integration and participation in value chains.
Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu together account for about 56 percent of India’s exports, with Gujarat alone contributing nearly 30 percent, driven mainly by petrochemicals and gems and jewelry. Their performance reflects decades of investment in ports, industrial corridors, and special economic zones, as well as policy stability and administrative capability.
Export Preparedness or Policy Illusion?
The EPI 2024 is a serious, data-heavy effort to assess how ready India’s states are to boost exports, and a great deal of work has gone into it. Yet the absence of a proper macroeconomic perspective reduces the value of many of its useful facts and insights. The idea that states or districts can significantly raise exports purely through their own effort is questionable. Many decisive factors lie beyond their control. For instance, the United States has imposed a 50 per cent import duty on most Indian goods other than services and pharmaceuticals. This has hurt garment exports across the country, no matter how well-prepared individual states may be.
Similarly, the exchange rate plays a critical role in export competitiveness, but it is determined at the national level, not by state governments. Market access depends largely on trade agreements, geopolitical relations, and India’s position in global supply chains—all shaped by central government policy. Building strong supply chain linkages also depends on national industrial policy, backed by spending on infrastructure, design, and research and development.
The cost of capital is set by the Reserve Bank of India’s monetary policy, while import duties on inputs can make or break the viability of exports, regardless of where production takes place. Non-tariff barriers, such as strict quality standards, can raise costs just as much as tariffs. For example, high import duties on synthetic yarn and fibre have constrained India’s garment industry, even though global demand is largely for synthetic or blended fabrics. States may raise such concerns, but decisions rest with the Centre.
There are also cases where one state’s export potential is limited by another state’s weaknesses. A town may be close to a port located in a neighbouring state, but poor road conditions there can delay shipments and raise costs. Measuring export preparedness only within administrative boundaries ignores such realities. In addition, some states contribute significantly through the export of skilled labour, generating large remittance inflows for the country. This is barely captured in the report’s framework. While services exports, including tourism, are mentioned, their true importance is not adequately reflected in the index.
Does this mean the entire exercise is pointless? Not at all. The report usefully highlights gaps between states and helps administrations identify weaknesses in infrastructure, regulation, and institutional capacity. Addressing these gaps can improve overall economic efficiency. But success in merchandise exports requires far more. With the rise of artificial intelligence and advanced robotics, many labour-intensive industries may become capital-intensive, while entirely new export opportunities may emerge. Understanding and preparing for these shifts would arguably be more valuable than producing rankings based on today’s conditions.
The report’s core objective is to shift attention away from headline export numbers to the deeper conditions that allow firms to compete globally. In doing so, it rightly draws attention to India’s uneven export landscape. A small group of states dominates exports. Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu together account for about 56 per cent of India’s exports, with Gujarat alone contributing nearly 30 per cent, driven mainly by petrochemicals and gems and jewellery. Their performance reflects decades of investment in ports, industrial corridors, and special economic zones, along with policy stability and administrative capability.
At the same time, the report highlights positive signs of diversification. Haryana’s automobile-led exports have been relatively stable despite commodity price swings. Telangana has gained strength in high-value sectors such as pharmaceuticals and aerospace. Odisha is gradually moving beyond minerals through industrial expansion. Himachal Pradesh recorded export growth of around 9 per cent in 2023–24, largely driven by pharmaceuticals, which now account for nearly 70 per cent of its exports. These cases show that export capacity can widen when infrastructure, policy focus, and firm capabilities come together.
The contrast is stark in poorer-performing states such as Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and several North-eastern states. Weak logistics, shallow industrial bases, fragile MSME ecosystems, and regulatory hurdles continue to limit their export potential. At the district level, concentration is even sharper. The top 100 districts account for almost 88 per cent of India’s exports, with about 70 of them located in just eight states.
Large parts of the country remain disconnected from global markets despite having potential in agriculture, textiles, labour-intensive manufacturing, or niche products. While export competitiveness is ultimately shaped by macroeconomic policy and global conditions beyond states’ control, local conditions determine which firms can export when opportunities arise. Businesses experience competitiveness through reliable power, good roads to ports, faster approvals, access to testing facilities, availability of credit, and skilled labour.
These are precisely the areas where state and district governments matter. Despite the setback caused by the United States’ unfair tariff measures, India is pursuing trade agreements with other partners, including the European Union. Such agreements will deliver results only if India is ready to seize the opportunities they create. In that preparation, states have an important role to play—and studies like this, despite their limitations, can help point the way.
Some Significant Observations
- NITI Aayog’s Export Preparedness Index (EPI) 2024, evaluates the export readiness of Indian States and Union Territories and underscores their pivotal role in achieving India’s USD 1 trillion merchandise export target by 2030.
- States and UTs are grouped into large states, Small States, North-eastern States, and Union Territories, and further classified within each group as Leaders (high preparedness), Challengers (moderate preparedness with scope for improvement), and Aspirers (early-stage export development).
- The top-performing large States are Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, and Andhra Pradesh. Among the small States, North Eastern States, and Union Territories, the leading performers are Uttarakhand, Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu, and Goa.
- The primary objectives of the Index are to assess the robustness, resilience, and inclusiveness of sub-national export ecosystems; to identify structural constraints, systemic bottlenecks, and key growth drivers at both the State and district levels.
- The index assesses preparedness across four key pillars—business ecosystem, export infrastructure, policy and governance, and export performance—drawing on a comprehensive set of indicators, including MSME depth, logistics efficiency, regulatory capacity, and export diversification.
- Some states contribute significantly through the export of skilled labour, generating large remittance inflows for the country. This is barely captured in the report’s framework. While services exports, including tourism, are mentioned, their true importance is not adequately reflected in the index.
- Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, and several northeastern states have weak logistics, shallow industrial bases, fragile MSME ecosystems, and regulatory hurdles.
- The top 100 districts account for almost 88 percent of India’s exports, with about 70 of them located in just eight states.
- Himachal Pradesh recorded export growth of around 9 per cent in 2023–24, largely driven by pharmaceuticals, which now account for nearly 70 per cent of its exports.
