The
Planning Commission has periodically estimated poverty lines and poverty ratios
for each of the years for which Large Sample Surveys on Household Consumer
Expenditure have been conducted by the National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) of
the Ministry of Statistics and Programme
Implementation. These surveys are normally conducted on quinquennial
basis. The last quinquennial survey in this series
was conducted in 2009-10 (NSS 66th round). However, since 2009-10
was not a normal year because of a severe drought, the NSSO repeated the large
scale survey in 2011-12 (NSS 68th round). The summary results of
this survey were released on 20th June 2013.
Estimates for
2004-05 and 2009-10
2.
The methodology
for estimation of poverty followed by the Planning Commission has been based on
the recommendations made by experts in the field from time to time. In
December, 2005, Planning Commission constituted an Expert Group under the
Chairmanship of Prof. Suresh D. Tendulkar to review
the methodology for estimation of poverty. The Tendulkar
Committee submitted its report in December 2009 and computed poverty lines and
poverty ratios for 2004-05. For comparison they also computed poverty lines and
poverty ratios for 1993-94 with identical methodology. These were accepted by
the Planning Commission.
3.
The next Large
Sample Survey of Household Consumer Expenditure was conducted in 2009-10.
Following the Tendulkar Committee methodology,
Planning Commission made estimates of poverty for 2009-10 which were released
through a Press Note on 19th March 2012.1 Since several
representations were made suggesting that the Tendulkar
Poverty Line was too low, the Planning Commission, in June 2012, constituted an
Expert Group under the Chairmanship of Dr. C. Rangarajan
to once again review the methodology for the measurement of poverty.
1 Tendulkar methodology uses implicit prices derived from
quantity and value data collected in household consumer expenditure surveys for
computing and updating the poverty lines.
4. The Rangarajan Committee is deliberating on this issue and is
expected to submit its report by middle of 2014. Since the data from the NSS
68th round (2011-12) of Household Consumer Expenditure Survey is now available,
and the Rangarajan Committee recommendation will only
be available a year later, the Planning Commission has updated the poverty
estimates for the year 2011-12 as per the methodology recommended by Tendulkar Committee.
Estimates for
2011-12
5.
The estimates
of state wise poverty lines for rural and urban areas for 2011-12 are given in Table
1. The percentage and number of persons below poverty line for all
States/UTs for rural areas, urban areas and combined are given in Table-2.
The all India poverty ratio is obtained as state-population weighted average
poverty ratio, and the all India poverty line is the per capita per month
expenditure that corresponds to the all India poverty ratio.
6.
The NSSO
tabulates expenditure of about 1.20 lakh households.
Since these households have different number of members, the NSSO for purpose
of comparison divides the household expenditure by the number of members to
arrive at per capita consumption expenditure per month. This is called Monthly
Per Capita Consumption Expenditure (MPCE) and is computed on the basis of three
different concepts: Uniform Reference Period (URP), Mixed Reference Period
(MRP), and Modified Mixed Reference Period (MMRP). As per Tendulkar
Methodology, the poverty line has been expressed in terms of MPCE based on
Mixed Reference Period. State-wise estimates of Average Monthly Per Capita
Expenditure for rural and urban areas separately for the year 2011-12 are given
in Table-3.
7.
For 2011-12,
for rural areas the national poverty line using the Tendulkar
methodology is estimated at Rs. 816 per capita per month and Rs. 1,000 per
capita per month in urban areas. Thus, for a family of five, the all India
poverty line in terms of consumption expenditure would amount to about Rs.
4,080 per month in rural areas and Rs. 5,000 per month in urban areas. These
poverty lines would vary from State to State because of inter-state price
differentials.
8.
The national
level poverty ratio based on comparable methodology (Tendulkar
Method) for 1993-94, 2004-05 and 2011-12 estimated from Large Sample Survey of
Household Consumer Expenditure data of 50th, 61st and 68th
round respectively are given below.
Percentage and
Number of Poor Estimated by Tendulkar method, using
Mixed Reference Period (MRP)
|
Poverty Ratio
(%)
|
Number
of Poor (million)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rural
|
Urban
|
Total
|
Rural
|
Urban
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. 1993-94
|
50.1
|
31.8
|
45.3
|
328.6
|
74.5
|
403.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. 2004-05
|
41.8
|
25.7
|
37.2
|
326.3
|
80.8
|
407.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. 2011-12
|
25.7
|
13.7
|
21.9
|
216.5
|
52.8
|
269.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual
Average Decline: 1993-94
|
0.75
|
0.55
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
|
to 2004-05
(percentage points
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per annum)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual
Average Decline: 2004-05
|
2.32
|
1.69
|
2.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to 2011-12
(percentage points
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per annum)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.
The percentage
of persons below the Poverty Line in 2011-12 has been estimated as 25.7% in
rural areas, 13.7% in urban areas and 21.9% for the country as a whole. The
respective ratios for the rural and urban areas were 41.8% and 25.7% and 37.2%
for the country as a whole in 2004-05. It was 50.1% in rural areas, 31.8% in
urban areas and 45.3% for the country as a whole in 1993-94. In 2011-12, India
had 270 million persons below the Tendulkar Poverty
Line as compared to 407 million in 2004-05, that is a reduction of 137 million
persons over the seven year period.
10.
During the
11-year period 1993-94 to 2004-05, the average decline in the poverty ratio was
0.74 percentage points per year. It accelerated to 2.18 percentage points per
year during the 7-year period 2004-05 to 2011-12. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the rate of decline in the poverty ratio during the most recent
7-year period 2004-05 to 2011-12 was about three times of that experienced in
the 11-year period 1993-94 to 2004-05.
11.
It is important
to note that although the trend decline documented above is based on the Tendulkar poverty line which is being reviewed and may be
revised by the Rangarajan Committee, an increase in
the poverty line will not alter the fact of a decline. While the absolute
levels of poverty would be higher, the rate of decline would be similar. To
illustrate the point, details about the magnitude of decline in poverty ratio
at various levels above and below the Tendulkar
Poverty Line are presented in Chart-1.
12. The decline
in poverty flows from the increase in real per capita consumption. The per
annum increase in real MPCE for each of the ten deciles is presented at Chart-2.
The clear inference is that: (a) the real MPCE increased by much more in the
second period (2004-05 to 2011-12) as compared to the first (1993-94 to
2004-05), (b) that the increase was fairly well distributed across all deciles
of the population, and (c) the distribution was particularly equitable in rural
areas.
*******
Table 1
State specific
Poverty Lines for 2011-12
|
|
Monthly per capita
|
S.No.
|
States
|
(Rs.)
|
|
|
RURAL
|
URBAN
|
1
|
Andhra
Pradesh
|
860
|
1,009
|
2
|
Arunachal
Pradesh
|
930
|
1,060
|
3
|
Assam
|
828
|
1,008
|
4
|
Bihar
|
778
|
923
|
5
|
Chhattisgarh
|
738
|
849
|
6
|
Delhi
|
1,145
|
1,134
|
7
|
Goa
|
1,090
|
1,134
|
8
|
Gujarat
|
932
|
1,152
|
9
|
Haryana
|
1,015
|
1,169
|
10
|
Himachal
Pradesh
|
913
|
1,064
|
11
|
Jammu &
Kashmir
|
891
|
988
|
12
|
Jharkhand
|
748
|
974
|
13
|
Karnataka
|
902
|
1,089
|
14
|
Kerala
|
1,018
|
987
|
15
|
Madhya
Pradesh
|
771
|
897
|
16
|
Maharashtra
|
967
|
1,126
|
17
|
Manipur
|
1,118
|
1,170
|
18
|
Meghalaya
|
888
|
1,154
|
19
|
Mizoram
|
1,066
|
1,155
|
20
|
Nagaland
|
1,270
|
1,302
|
21
|
Odisha
|
695
|
861
|
22
|
Punjab
|
1,054
|
1,155
|
23
|
Rajasthan
|
905
|
1,002
|
24
|
Sikkim
|
930
|
1,226
|
25
|
Tamil Nadu
|
880
|
937
|
26
|
Tripura
|
798
|
920
|
27
|
Uttarakhand
|
880
|
1,082
|
28
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
768
|
941
|
29
|
West Bengal
|
783
|
981
|
30
|
Puducherry
|
1,301
|
1,309
|
|
All
India
|
816
|
1,000
|
Note:
Computed as per Tendulkar method on Mixed Reference
Period (MRP)
Table 2
Number and
Percentage of Population below poverty line by states - 2011-12 (Tendulkar Methodology)
|
|
Rural
|
|
Urban
|
Total
|
|
|
S.No.
|
States
|
%age of
|
|
No. of
|
%age of
|
No. of
|
%age of
|
|
No. of
|
|
|
Persons
|
Persons
|
|
Persons
|
|
|
|
Persons
|
|
Persons
|
Persons
|
|
|
|
|
|
(lakhs)
|
(lakhs)
|
|
(lakhs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
Andhra
Pradesh
|
10.96
|
|
61.80
|
5.81
|
16.98
|
9.20
|
|
78.78
|
|
2
|
Arunachal
Pradesh
|
38.93
|
|
4.25
|
20.33
|
0.66
|
34.67
|
|
4.91
|
|
3
|
Assam
|
33.89
|
|
92.06
|
20.49
|
9.21
|
31.98
|
|
101.27
|
|
4
|
Bihar
|
34.06
|
|
320.40
|
31.23
|
37.75
|
33.74
|
|
358.15
|
|
5
|
Chhattisgarh
|
44.61
|
|
88.90
|
24.75
|
15.22
|
39.93
|
|
104.11
|
|
6
|
Delhi
|
12.92
|
|
0.50
|
9.84
|
16.46
|
9.91
|
|
16.96
|
|
7
|
Goa
|
6.81
|
|
0.37
|
4.09
|
0.38
|
5.09
|
|
0.75
|
|
8
|
Gujarat
|
21.54
|
|
75.35
|
10.14
|
26.88
|
16.63
|
|
102.23
|
|
9
|
Haryana
|
11.64
|
|
19.42
|
10.28
|
9.41
|
11.16
|
|
28.83
|
|
10
|
Himachal
Pradesh
|
8.48
|
|
5.29
|
4.33
|
0.30
|
8.06
|
|
5.59
|
|
11
|
Jammu &
Kashmir
|
11.54
|
|
10.73
|
7.20
|
2.53
|
10.35
|
|
13.27
|
|
12
|
Jharkhand
|
40.84
|
|
104.09
|
24.83
|
20.24
|
36.96
|
|
124.33
|
|
13
|
Karnataka
|
24.53
|
|
92.80
|
15.25
|
36.96
|
20.91
|
|
129.76
|
|
14
|
Kerala
|
9.14
|
|
15.48
|
4.97
|
8.46
|
7.05
|
|
23.95
|
|
15
|
Madhya
Pradesh
|
35.74
|
|
190.95
|
21.00
|
43.10
|
31.65
|
|
234.06
|
|
16
|
Maharashtra
|
24.22
|
|
150.56
|
9.12
|
47.36
|
17.35
|
|
197.92
|
|
17
|
Manipur
|
38.80
|
|
7.45
|
32.59
|
2.78
|
36.89
|
|
10.22
|
|
18
|
Meghalaya
|
12.53
|
|
3.04
|
9.26
|
0.57
|
11.87
|
|
3.61
|
|
19
|
Mizoram
|
35.43
|
|
1.91
|
6.36
|
0.37
|
20.40
|
|
2.27
|
|
20
|
Nagaland
|
19.93
|
|
2.76
|
16.48
|
1.00
|
18.88
|
|
3.76
|
|
21
|
Odisha
|
35.69
|
|
126.14
|
17.29
|
12.39
|
32.59
|
|
138.53
|
|
22
|
Punjab
|
7.66
|
|
13.35
|
9.24
|
9.82
|
8.26
|
|
23.18
|
|
23
|
Rajasthan
|
16.05
|
|
84.19
|
10.69
|
18.73
|
14.71
|
|
102.92
|
|
24
|
Sikkim
|
9.85
|
|
0.45
|
3.66
|
0.06
|
8.19
|
|
0.51
|
|
25
|
Tamil Nadu
|
15.83
|
|
59.23
|
6.54
|
23.40
|
11.28
|
|
82.63
|
|
26
|
Tripura
|
16.53
|
|
4.49
|
7.42
|
0.75
|
14.05
|
|
5.24
|
|
27
|
Uttarakhand
|
11.62
|
|
8.25
|
10.48
|
3.35
|
11.26
|
|
11.60
|
|
28
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
30.40
|
|
479.35
|
26.06
|
118.84
|
29.43
|
|
598.19
|
|
29
|
West Bengal
|
22.52
|
|
141.14
|
14.66
|
43.83
|
19.98
|
|
184.98
|
|
30
|
Puducherry
|
17.06
|
|
0.69
|
6.30
|
0.55
|
9.69
|
|
1.24
|
|
31
|
Andaman &
Nicobar Islands
|
1.57
|
|
0.04
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
1.00
|
|
0.04
|
|
32
|
Chandigarh
|
1.64
|
|
0.004
|
22.31
|
2.34
|
21.81
|
|
2.35
|
|
33
|
Dadra &
Nagar Haveli
|
62.59
|
|
1.15
|
15.38
|
0.28
|
39.31
|
|
1.43
|
|
34
|
Daman &
Diu
|
0.00
|
|
0.00
|
12.62
|
0.26
|
9.86
|
|
0.26
|
|
35
|
Lakshadweep
|
0.00
|
|
0.00
|
3.44
|
0.02
|
2.77
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
All India
|
25.70
|
|
2166.58
|
13.70
|
531.25
|
21.92
|
|
2697.83
|
|
Notes: 1. Population as on 1st March 2012 has been used for estimating
number of persons below poverty line. (2011 Census population extrapolated)
2. Poverty line of Tamil Nadu has been used for Andaman and Nicobar
Island.
3. Urban Poverty Line of Punjab has been used for both rural and urban
areas of Chandigarh.
4. Poverty
Line of Maharashtra has been used for Dadra & Nagar Haveli.
5. Poverty line of Goa has been used for Daman & Diu.
6. Poverty
Line of Kerala has been used for Lakshadweep.
Table 3
State-wise
estimates of Average Monthly Per Capita Expenditure (MPCE) as per Mixed
Reference Period (MRP) for 2011-12
S.No.
|
States/UTs
|
Rural
|
Urban
|
1
|
Andhra
Pradesh
|
1563.21
|
2559.30
|
2
|
Arunachal
Pradesh
|
1455.87
|
2241.63
|
3
|
Assam
|
1056.98
|
2090.18
|
4
|
Bihar
|
970.41
|
1396.65
|
5
|
Chhattisgarh
|
904.04
|
1776.21
|
6
|
Delhi
|
2690.24
|
3160.76
|
7
|
Goa
|
2460.77
|
2934.87
|
8
|
Gujarat
|
1430.12
|
2472.49
|
9
|
Haryana
|
1925.96
|
3346.32
|
10
|
Himachal
Pradesh
|
1800.62
|
3173.30
|
11
|
Jammu &
Kashmir
|
1601.51
|
2320.28
|
12
|
Jharkhand
|
919.59
|
1894.41
|
13
|
Karnataka
|
1395.10
|
2898.94
|
14
|
Kerala
|
2355.53
|
3044.22
|
15
|
Madhya
Pradesh
|
1024.14
|
1842.35
|
16
|
Maharashtra
|
1445.89
|
2937.06
|
17
|
Manipur
|
1334.55
|
1448.91
|
18
|
Meghalaya
|
1315.11
|
2293.82
|
19
|
Mizoram
|
1384.44
|
2426.53
|
20
|
Nagaland
|
1756.70
|
2279.42
|
21
|
Odisha
|
904.78
|
1830.33
|
22
|
Punjab
|
2136.39
|
2743.07
|
23
|
Rajasthan
|
1445.74
|
2206.93
|
24
|
Sikkim
|
1445.06
|
2528.11
|
25
|
Tamil Nadu
|
1570.61
|
2534.32
|
26
|
Tripura
|
1194.14
|
1996.66
|
27
|
Uttarakhand
|
1551.42
|
2452.02
|
28
|
Uttar Pradesh
|
1072.93
|
1942.25
|
29
|
West Bengal
|
1170.11
|
2489.89
|
30
|
A & N
Island
|
2508.19
|
4439.03
|
31
|
Chandigarh
|
2543.57
|
3000.27
|
32
|
Dadra and
Nagar
|
1094.20
|
2346.15
|
33
|
Daman and Diu
|
2239.45
|
2163.94
|
34
|
Lakshwadeep
|
2533.07
|
2666.49
|
35
|
Puducherry
|
2309.92
|
2959.82
|
|
ALL
INDIA
|
1287.17
|
2477.02
|
Source: NSSO Report No. KI.(68/1.0) on Key
Indicators of Household Consumer Expenditure in India 2011-12, NSS 68th
round, National Sample Survey Office
Chart 1
Decline in
poverty at various points above and below the Tendulkar
Poverty Line
(Annualized
Rate of Decline on Y-axis and the variations from Tendulkar
PL on X-axis)
RURAL AREAS
Per annum Rate
of Decline in Poverty Ratio Rural
2.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.40
|
|
|
2004-05 to 2011-12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tendulkar
PL
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
1993-94 to 2004-05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
minus 50%
|
minus 20%
|
plus 10%
|
plus 40%
|
plus 70%
|
plus 100%
|
|
URBAN AREAS
Per annum Rate
of Decline in Poverty Ratio Urban
2.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.40
|
|
|
|
2004-05 to 2011-12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tendulkar
PL
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
1993-94 to 2004-05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
minus 50%
|
minus 20%
|
plus 10%
|
plus 40%
|
plus 70%
|
plus 100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chart 2
Increase in
Real Monthly Per Capita Consumption Expenditure (MPCE) – URP Annualized – for
two periods
(Rate of
Increase in Real MPCE on Y-axis and Decile class on
X-axis)
RURAL AREAS
Avg =
3.40
URBAN AREAS
|
|
1993-94 to
2004-05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
URBAN
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
2004-05 to
2011-12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
annum
increase
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
Avg =
3.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
Avg =
1.49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st
|
2nd
|
3rd
|
4th
|
5th
|
6th
|
7th
|
8th
|
9th
|
10th
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Release ID :97365)