Which one of the following is NOT a consequence of 'Shock Therapy' ? (A) The value of the Rouble, the Russian

Question

Q. Which one of the following is NOT a consequence of 'Shock Therapy' ? (A) The value of the Rouble, the Russian currency declined. (B) The economy of the entire region was ruined. (C) The system of social welfare got strengthened. (D) The collective farm system disintegrated.

CBSECBSE Class XII Board 2026MCQ· 1mImportance★★★★★

🔒 Locked · start free trial →

You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Concept understanding — Economic Transition Shock

Economic Transition Shock – First Encounter

Imagine a country that has been running a command economy for decades — the government decides what to produce, how much, and at what price. Then, overnight, it decides to switch to a market economy where prices are set by supply and demand, private businesses are allowed, and state controls are lifted. What happens next is not a smooth glide into prosperity. It is a jolt — factories close, prices skyrocket, jobs vanish, and people who depended on the old system suddenly have no safety net. That jolt is an economic transition shock.

The intuition is simple: when an entire economic system is dismantled and replaced by a different one, the adjustment is violent. The old coordination mechanisms (government orders, fixed prices, guaranteed employment) disappear before the new ones (markets, contracts, private credit) are fully functional. In the gap, output collapses, inflation surges, and unemployment spikes.

The Precise Statement

Economic Transition Shock is the sharp, often severe decline in output, employment, and living standards that occurs when a centrally planned economy begins the process of transitioning to a market-based economy, typically accompanied by high inflation, fiscal crisis, and institutional breakdown.

Key characteristics:

Output collapse: GDP can fall by 20–40% in the first few years. This is not a recession in the usual sense — it is the disappearance of entire industries that were kept alive by state orders but cannot survive market prices.
Price liberalisation shock: When price controls are removed, pent-up inflation explodes. Prices of basic goods may rise 10–100 times in months.
Fiscal crisis: The state loses its main revenue source (profits from state enterprises) while still having to pay pensions, subsidies, and salaries. Budget deficits balloon.
Institutional vacuum: Laws for private property, bankruptcy, banking, and contracts do not exist yet. Without these, new businesses cannot easily replace the old state firms.

Why It Happens – The Mechanism

In a command economy, production is driven by targets, not by consumer demand. Factories produce goods nobody wants, but they are kept running because the state pays for them. When the state stops ordering, those factories have no customers and no reason to exist. They shut down.

At the same time, the new private sector cannot spring up overnight. Entrepreneurs need:

clear property rights
functioning banks
enforceable contracts
a stable currency …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

The correct answer is (C) — the system of social welfare got strengthened. Shock Therapy actually dismantled welfare systems, not strengthened them.

The term "Shock Therapy" refers to the rapid, sweeping economic reforms adopted by Russia and other former Soviet republics in the early 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The idea was to transition from a centrally planned economy to a market economy almost overnight — privatising state-owned industries, removing price controls, cutting subsidies, and opening up to foreign trade. The results were brutal and far-reaching.

Let's look at each option to see which one does not fit.

Option (A) — the value of the Rouble declined. This is a well-documented consequence. As price controls were lifted and the economy spiralled into hyperinflation, the Russian currency lost much of its value. Ordinary people saw their savings wiped out. So this is a genuine consequence.

Option (B) — the economy of the entire region was ruined. This is also true. The transition was chaotic. Industrial output collapsed, unemployment soared, and poverty became widespread. The former Soviet republics, including Russia, experienced a severe economic depression in the 1990s. So this is a genuine consequence.

Option (D) — the collective farm system disintegrated. Under Shock Therapy, state and collective farms were privatised or broken up. The old system of collective agriculture, which had been a cornerstone of the Soviet economy, fell apart. Many farms were mismanaged or abandoned, leading to a sharp drop in agricultural production. So this too is a genuine consequence.

Note

The collective farm system (kolkhoz) was a Soviet institution where land and equipment were owned collectively by the state. Shock Therapy's privatisation drive targeted these farms directly, leading to their rapid disintegration. …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Same / Similar Concept — real previous-year questions on the same or a closely similar concept, not this exact question.

CBSE 2026Set 59/2/11 markMCQ
$Q. Which one of the following is NOT a consequence of 'Shock Therapy' ? (A) The value of the Rouble, the Russian currency declined. (B) The economy of the entire region was ruined. (C) The system of social welfare got strengthened. (D) The collective farm system disintegrated.$
›Reveal solutionSolution

The correct answer is (C) — the system of social welfare got strengthened. Shock Therapy actually dismantled welfare systems, not strengthened them.

The term "Shock Therapy" refers to the rapid, sweeping economic reforms adopted by Russia and other former Soviet republics in the early 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The idea was to transition from a centrally planned economy to a market economy almost overnight — privatising state-owned industries, removing price controls, cutting subsidies, and opening up to foreign trade. The results were brutal and far-reaching.

Let's look at each option to see which one does not fit.

Option (A) — the value of the Rouble declined. This is a well-documented consequence. As price controls were lifted and the economy spiralled into hyperinflation, the Russian currency lost much of its value. Ordinary people saw their savings wiped out. So this is a genuine consequence.

Option (B) — the economy of the entire region was ruined. This is also true. The transition was chaotic. Industrial output collapsed, unemployment soared, and poverty became widespread. The former Soviet republics, including Russia, experienced a severe economic depression in the 1990s. So this is a genuine consequence.

Option (D) — the collective farm system disintegrated. Under Shock Therapy, state and collective farms were privatised or broken up. The old system of collective agriculture, which had been a cornerstone of the Soviet economy, fell apart. Many farms were mismanaged or abandoned, leading to a sharp drop in agricultural production. So this too is a genuine consequence.

Note

The collective farm system (kolkhoz) was a Soviet institution where land and equipment were owned collectively by the state. Shock Therapy's privatisation drive targeted these farms directly, leading to their rapid disintegration. …

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →

Q.Which one of the following is NOT a consequence of 'Shock Therapy' ? (A) The value of the Rouble, the Russian currency declined. (B) The economy of the entire region was ruined. (C) The system of social welfare got strengthened. (D) The collective farm system disintegrated.

🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days

Unlock everything free for 14 days