The government has constituted one more expert group to re-examine the methodology for fixing a poverty line and estimating the incidence of poverty in the country. Changes in average incomes and consumption patterns over time may require review and revision of the approach currently in use. However, the last such review of the methodology originally recommended by the Lakdawala committee (1993) was undertaken after more than a decade by the Suresh Tendulkar Committee. The Tendulkar committee was constituted in December 2005, submitted its report in November 2009 and its recommendations were formally accepted only in 2011. The decision to revisit the matter again so soon suggests the government is finding it difficult to offer a credible estimate of what can be considered a consumption basket and level of expenditure that would provide a definition of poverty. This lack of credibility stems from multiple sources. The first is the absolute value of the poverty line. Few are willing to accept the official position that a measly Rs. 32 a day in urban areas or Rs. 26 a day in rural areas in 2010-11 was adequate to lift a person out of poverty. The second is evidence that while the Lakdawala committee had anchored the poverty estimate on a minimum calorific intake, the current poverty line excludes from the poor those whose calorific intake falls far short of the Lakdawala minimum. Third are the estimates of the incidence of poverty at the level of the nation and the States yielded by the official poverty lines, which are seen as too low to be acceptable. This is also a material issue since these estimates are being used to identify those who should be given the benefit of state support as part of the misplaced “targeting” of welfare programmes.
These controversies demarcate the task of the new committee headed by C. Rangarajan. Rather than seek a number that sets a cap on access to state programmes, it should define what in the current historical and social context could be considered a minimally acceptable level of consumption expenditure. To do so it should identify a defensible anchor (like calorific intake) or set of anchors to which poverty line estimates would be tethered for a reasonable period into the future. And, finally, it should find a robust methodology that would generate estimates that allow inter-temporal comparisons of poverty incidence so as to assess the impact that the path of development being pursued has had on poverty levels. These are objectives that must be met if the exercise is not to be seen as one more attempt to obfuscate uncomfortable truths.
Keywords: poverty line, planning commission
someone has told about the geographical area poverty as Rs32,Rs26
....the value of prices are diffrent in every states but still the money
is fix situated ...is this a good way to to our india where country is
making a gaint form !1
The question before us is why one is poor? Don’t we think our habit of eating half plate and wasting the rest in the sink. That wasted plate could have satisfied the hunger of the poor, for which the whole country is debating – how to define his line. Can’t we feed the hungry with the surplus food with the nation and in the kitchen of the Haves ? The quantity of our wasted plates is so huge that it is enough to feed all the poor ! More over, we ( the APL population ) eat more than required and then try to burn the extra calories by jogging, walking etc. etc. So, all persons are requested, not to waste the food ( produced by the farmers spending their day and night in the fields – in all seasons – hot or cold, when we sleep comfortably in our A.C. rooms ). Please don’t waste in sink, thereby in the sewer line and ultimately in the rivers to pollute our lifeline - the water itself !
Those who are commissioned to measure poverty unfortunately have no realistic assessment of the prevailing conditions in the country. It is impossible to calculate a universal measure of poverty in a country where food habits, clothing habits and shelter habits are so diverse. There is also the element of induced poverty in the form of taking to begging for alms. Poverty to a sheep rearer in Ladakh would be different to that of a toddy collector in Kanyakumari. How can any evaluation team emperically arrive at a proper value. Unnecessary Parliament time is wasted discussing the issue when action plans for development should be the focus of attention. It would appear all the political parties are only interested in strengthening their vote banks by shedding crocodile tears on assumed level of poverty in abject numerical terms comparing it to those earning many times over. Also the family income is an important reckoning factor totally ignored by those entrusted with the exercise.
Poverty would be based on the minimum calorie intake needed for a good health, minimum expenditure(for basic education) needed for education for a family.
Can we imagine a good health by expending 32/- per day in a family.
I dont think a person can live by earning just Rs.32/- per month. Our food costs more than that infact.
I attended a seminar on April 8, 1972 on the subject "Quit Poverty - how? in New Delhi's Gandhi Peace Foundation. I remember I had come from my village in Haryana to attend this seminar. My main aim was to ascertain how to identify a poor and how many people were suffering from poverty in my village. I have attended a large number of seminars and talks in New Delhi but could not find the answer. However, I find that economists are more expert at estimating the number of poor in India - ranging from 26% to 77% but are not ready to discuss how to remove poverty? Our Government also takes more interest in setting up Commission or Committee or Panel to estimate the number of poor. Let us hope the Rangarajan committee will be the last one on poverty and will answer the question :How to identify a poor in a village?" so that the poor can be counted in every village.
SC Aggarwal, Founder, Poverty Trust, New Delhi.
Dear Padmakumar Rao and Sunny, I am having in mind few words from Indian constitution's preamble "JUSTICE, LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY"- the word "EQUALITY (of status and opportunity)" is enough to suggest that Poverty estimation based upon caloric intake is flawed. The question here before us is who is poor and/or defining poverty. Not that what is our capacity to help. In my opinion, capacity to help can not define what is poverty. These two things are different and should be dealt separately. Even if honest definition of poverty makes 70% of Indian population BPL, we should be honest to own it. It will show the mirror to us and will make us work harder to achieve the heightened goal. Thanks to your input, it is clear that we need to define different levels of poverty to provide different level of assistance to optimize the outcome.
Whatever be the definition of poverty, the aim should be to reduce the families below the poverty line. I also believe that there is no shortage of funds for poverty alleviation but the bitter truth is that not even one political party is ready to abandon populist programmes, which do no good to the poor but help the corrupt bureaucracy to make merry at the cost of the exchequer. Until this situation changes and we are able to ensure that the public funds are actually utilized for the benefit of the poor, appointment of another expert group to fix the poverty line will be of little use.
the money spend on these committe member,s should be used for the welfare of society.That can make india proud.
Mr. Hitesh and triratna C are advocating for not only calorific needs but also other basic and social needs. Dear, tell me if in my family there is one who is not getting full two times meal and other who is geeting it but not having good clothes and education facility, whom should I help first. Answer cannot be simply it's the first or the second whom I should help, rather it depends on my position to help them out. This is what is need to be understood here. GoI can't help every one due to monetory and other constaints. But it also doesn't mean I should not help the one who need it the most. So its the case where we have to start from the bottom and gradually increase our sphare of inclusion.
Evaluation of poverty line is must for knowing that how far we have moved forward in ensuring equity in our population which is one of the goal of our planning since independence. The editor has himself pointed out the prospect in which we are lagging. The tendulkar committee constituted in 2005 and its recommendation accepted in 2011 shows that when we accept the recommendation in our poverty alleviation programme the whole scenario is changed because there is huge difference in population of India in 2005 and in 2011. We have long term and short term prospective in our plan but i think there must also be an immediate action so as to counter such a curse prevailing in country. We can have certain markers like minimum calorific value in lakdawala committee to evaluate poverty, and take adequate action so that this marker may not prevail. Next we can evaluate with another marker like housing and treat the malafide accordingly.
The current methodology use to measure poverty in the country is completely flawed.Genuine efforts needs to be made to get an accurate analysis of the extent of poverty in the country.The results and conclusions by the planning commision are completely skewed to give a feel good feeling to the massess but that's far from true..its time the country reconsider and revamp its policy of succumbing to capitalistic greed.We need an extensive quality healthcare for all....god forbid if you are poor and suffering from a serious disease theres nothing you can do other than to stare at the horror of approaching death
A wonderfull editorial indeed..a lucid explaination of what commissions
up to now has done and what was lacking in those reports!!!
I am total agree with Mr. Hitesh. The time has change, the requirement
of human has changed significantly. So by mere thinking of daily
expenditure or calorie intake wont give the clear index for poverty. one
need to study the other factors too,Food, shelter, clothes must be accompanied with education,social need also.
Everything the govt does to solve this actually aggravates the
problem.These govt programs have actually pushed more people into
poverty.The first thing that we need to understand is what creates
poverty and what creates prosperity.If the goal had been to create
poverty the current govt programs is would be the solution.The way
poverty is reduced is when the job creating people are taxed less so
that all the money can be invested in expanding or starting a new
business which will create productive jobs and bring people out of
poverty and improve their standard of living.All this expert groups
are a waste of a money.Had the govt not taxed the private industry to
fund these programs there would have more productive jobs with the
population being self-reliant rather than depending on the govt as is
the case now.But remember the govt doesn't have money to run these it
need to money away from the productive sector and hence will create
more poverty.
One point is worth noticing is that the Lakdawala committee was set up in 1993 , got under consideration in 2005 , submitted reports in 2009 & again recommendations were accepted in 2011 . It took 18 long years for action which is too slow. Whether there should not be any body which should monitor & force them to bring whatever o/p soon .
If the process is too slow , can't govt outsource this poverty line estimation to different private organisation bodies & NGO so that they will all come with diffrent and innovative ways.
The resources that have been spent over the years by policy makers to define a "poverty line" would have been more useful if directed to alleviating this poverty. We should be ashamed of ourselves as a country (including all of us in civil society) that we have been pulling th wool over so many unfortunate eyes. By now it should be evident that a poverty line is unrealistic and we should be defining a poverty band around which social welfare schemes should be targetted. Why do we have to keep going back to the drawing board when the Kudumbasree definition of poverty is available? Can the criteria used there not be adapted for the rest of the country?
I think the best method is to divide the country into geographical locations based on the availability of basic eminities, employment opportunities. For example, the poor in Bihar should be differentiated from poor in Andhra pradesh. Some statistical information can be derived by definig a well formulated parameters.
It is better to focus on those who don't even meet their caloric intake; as one reader puts it-
dogs life, to effectively implement policies.
It is hard to understand why the government is so obsessed with this poverty line? What difference does it make if the line is at Rs.26 or Rs.32, a poor person is still a poor person. Survival on a hand to mouth existence on a day to day basis is no way to live a life. This is just window dressing by the government trying to cover up its own inadequacies since economic development has become such a big election issue. Instead if parliament functioned properly and took timely policy decisions then maybe we need not have poverty in our country at all. Mind you, with a population of 1 billion unless the government takes urgent steps for economic development tinkering around with official figures will do nothing to disguise the fact that a majority of our population still lives in abysmal conditions.
The informative editorial exposes the incongruity in the methodology of our planning commission in rating poverty index in India.
That the significance of the intake of food, the vital calorie provider for the people misses the priority in index calculations,unfolds the centre's intent to transgress the otherwise reality of increased instances of poverty for political reasons. Through its bid to lower the ratio of poverty in India, it tries to gain political mileage eyeing on ensuing elections. Sadly,the statistics which is intented to assist the economists in the right directions, turns malleable in the hands of rulers, just to stem a rosy picture. I am reminiscent of the reputed private auditors, who sang in praise of the credit worthiness of the then Sathyam, which is yet to be retrieved from its debacle.
Poverty estimate based on caloric intake is flawed. Complete nutritional requirement (protein,minerals, vitamins, fat, carbs etc all) is necessary to grow into a healthy person. This is only diet requirement. Clothes,Education, medical and residence requirements should be included as well.
If we consider only diet and calorific requirements, the standard of life we will be talking about is that of a stray dogs. People of India, me included, has to make a choice- whether they want to talk about humans and implement policy for stray dogs or us humans.
Poverty of feeling for the people suffering from pecuniary problems is the bane of the modern day society in our country. Until the powers that be get a feeling of hurt on seeing the miserable economic conditions in which bulk of our population lives, the poor will stay where they are. It is shameful that nearly 66 years after the country got a democratic constitution, we are still trying to find out how many in the coubtry are poor.
Please Email the Editor