Gender Inequality- Part I (Sex Selective Abortions)

            Gender inequality means inequality based on gender of an individual and usually refers to the discrimination made against women. The practice has been prevalent in almost all over the world though some exceptions could be cited here and there. The practice had started quite early in the course of human history although its severity fluctuated from time to time. The differences were not so evident when the human beings were at the stage of hunters and food gatherers. However, slowly with agriculture becoming the mainstay of the economy led menfolk abandoning hunting and taking up full time agriculture. Introduction of heavy iron ploughshare, which increased agricultural output, also restricted participation of women in agriculture and slowly she was pushed in the four walls of the household. Economic activities in the prehistoric and early historical period were highly labour intensive requiring a steady supply of labour. It made economic sense to get this labour from the family. Women were expected to maintain this supply by giving birth to more and more sons. Socio-religious systems were accordingly moulded to achieve this objective and woman was made more and more subservient to the males. It was said in the texts that a virtuous women lived under control of her father in her childhood, her husband in her youth and her son in the old age.

            

            With the passage of time, this preference for male child continued to grow and in some areas developed into hatred for the girl child resulting in the inhuman and barbaric practice of female infanticide or killing of a girl child immediately after her birth. The problem has been amply documented during the colonial rule. The British detected the problem in 1789 when one of their officers, Jonathan Duncan, Resident of Benares, discovered that some families were practicing female infanticide. Soon it was noticed that the practice was prevalent in many areas of North and West India. Initially the British tried to solve the problem through social and religious manifestations, but when these methods failed to control the situation, “Female Infanticide Prevention Act” was brought in 1870 to prevent such killings. However, the evil practice could not be eradicated and the bias against the girl child has continued up to this day.

Economic and Social factors

            Social structure in our country has grown in a way which is discriminatory to the female. In the traditional Indian society, a daughter is not groomed to become financially independent and hence her capacity to make financial contributions to her parental family becomes severely restricted as compared to the son who is expected to provide support to the family. Daughter has to be married off after which she leaves her parental house and is in no position to make any contribution to her parental family. Apart from this the practice of dowry has made the financial burden heavier. Due to these reasons, many parents consider their daughters as burden which they may want to avoid.  

            At the social plane, in a patriarchal and feudal society like ours, more value is attached to a son, who is supposed to continue family lineage. Only he can conduct the last rites of parents and only he can offer prayers to ancestors. On the other hand, a girl has no such religious or social utility. When the girl grows up, she has to be given off in marriage. As per traditional social practice, the groom’s family is considered superior and the girl’s family has to unwillingly accept their ritualistic superiority. The practice prevails even now but was more deep rooted in the medieval period. This hurt the pride of many people, including many tribes in Punjab and led them to consider girls as a potential source of their indignation which they avoided by resorting to female infanticide.

Present situation

            In the later decades of the 20^th century, Aminocentesis test, which was supposed to be used for detecting genetic disorders, came to be used to determining foetal sex. Determination of foetal sex was further facilitated by the increase in use of sonography. Easy availability of these facilities coupled with unethical attitude of a number of professionals from the medical fraternity resulted in large number of sex selective abortions. Many of those people, who were earlier not resorting to female infanticide due to not being able to kill their own children or out of the fear of punishment for doing a murder, were now indulging in female foeticide. Socio-economic conditions as well as lack of appropriate legal provisions and poor implementation of existing laws has further aggravated the problem.

Declining Sex Ratio

            Most important impact of this practice has been witnessed in the decline in sex ratio i.e. the number of females per thousand males.  Some people have argued that decline in sex ratio is not only due to sex selective abortions but also due to the fact that infant  mortality rates and child mortality rates are higher for female child than the male child. The argument could be true. As per SRS Statistical Report 2011, Infant Mortality Rate i.e. infant deaths (within one year of birth) per thousand live births, is 46 for females and 43 for males. Similarly Child Death Rate i.e death rate of children between age 0-4 is 13 for females and 11.5 for males. However, this again is a due to discrimination between a boy and a girl in providing nutrition, healthcare etc.

Sex ratio in India has steadily declined since the beginning of 20^th century. As per census of 1901 the sex ratio was 972 which declined to 933 in the year 2001. As per 2011 census the ratio is 940 females per thousand males which though a marginal improvement from 2001 is still much lower than the global average of 984. It is all the more alarming as some of the most populous states like Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have sex ratios much lower than the national average, the figures being 908 and 916 respectively. Surprisingly, Delhi which is the national capital and has better facilities in terms of education and medical infrastructure has a very low sex ratio of 866, less than even that of Haryana, which is notorious for gender inequality and has a sex ratio of 877.

Impact of declining sex ratio

            This is an alarming situation having profound social impacts. In the long run, low sex ratio would lead to changes in the marriage patterns and family systems. Men are likely to suffer as there will be fewer brides to marry which would mean that men will have to delay their marriage and some of them will have to forego their marriage altogether. The families of those who marry late will have higher requirements as they will have less number of years to fulfill their responsibilities. Those who do not marry at all will have to be adjusted in their parental families which will affect the family patterns.

Women also do not stand to gain in this scenario, as they will face greater pressure for marrying and having a family at an early age which will affect their career prospects and hence their financial independence. Masculinization of society may also lead to more violence and crime against women. An undesirable aspect is the trafficking of women from poorer backgrounds for purpose of marriage with men in more areas which are economically more prosperous but have lesser number of females. Thus the situation will not benefit anyone but will result in loss for all.

Steps for prevention

            Female foeticide is a discrimination based on gender and is also the denial of Right to Life to the girl child. Section 312 to 315 of the Indian Penal Code relate to such kind of offences and provide for imprisonment and penalty for the offenders. However, the magnitude of the problem led the Government to enact the Pre Conception and Pre Natal Diagnostics Technology (PCPNDT) Act, 1994, which lays elaborate guidelines for doctors running ultrasound or other diagnostic centres capable of pre-natal sex determination. The Act also provides for imprisonment and fines for persons involved in sex determination. The Act is implemented by the Appropriate Authorities and Advisory Committees and Boards constituted under the Act.

However, punishments under the Act are few and rare, primary reason being the poor implementation of the Act. Although the Act was made in the year 1994, the corresponding rules were notified in the year 1996, after a delay of about two years. Even after this, the Act was not implemented properly. The Appropriate Authorities, Advisory Committees and Boards were not timely constituted in all the states due to which no action could be taken. This was noted by the Supreme Court in its judgment passed in the year 2003 in the case of Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT) & Others Vs Union of India. In the judgment, the Court directed the Government to implement the Act with zeal and vigour.

Present situation is that requisite authorities have been notified in the states; this has no doubt provided a legal framework for implementation of the Act. However, the punishments under the Act are rare, although, one of the reasons could be that the act of sex selection is done with the consent of all concerned leaving no quarter for complaint from any side. As such, the legal provisions do not appear to be have made a dent in the problem.

             Simultaneously, it has also been realized that the problem is essentially a social one and only legal provisions may not suffice. Considering this aspect, the government as well as some non government organizations, have been creating awareness on this subject through media and other campaigns. Some specific schemes are also being run by the Government in which various incentives are given to the girl child and her parents. The objective of these campaigns and schemes is to make people aware that girls do not bring a higher liability than boys and if given a chance, can rise to same heights as the boys.

Future

            Sex ratio as per census of 2011 is 940 which is a slight improvement from 932 as per census of 2001. However, this should not be a cause for happiness or complacency as sex ratio in the child population in age group of 0-6 years has declined from 927 in the year 2001 to 914 in the year 2011. This would mean that despite all the aforesaid efforts, problem has persisted and needs much stricter measures. One such measure could be enacting laws for putting this crime in the category of “murder” and dealt accordingly. Apart from this, we also need to remove gender bias from the society as only this will encourage parents to desist from this practice. 

Impact of colonialism on Indian economy

Colonial rule in India by its inherent nature worked for benefit of England and in turn impoverished India. Agriculture was the main source of livelihood for most of the people of India. However, agrarian relations i.e relations between the peasant and the state changed drastically under the British. Earlier system of Jagirdari prevalent under the Mughals was done away with. In this system, the King, the jagirdar and peasant had different rights on land and although there were some instances of land being sold or bought this was not the usual practice. The British introduced three types of land settlements, Permanent, Ryotwari and Mahalwari. In the first revenue settlement was made with the Zamindars, in the second directly with the peasants and in the third with the village communities. In the zamindari system, zamindar was recognized as the owner of the land and left free to extract maximum revenue from the cultivators leaving the peasantry impoverished and at the mercy of the zamindar. In other cases, the absence of zamindars did not bring any relief to the peasantry as revenue was fixed at exorbitant rates leaving the peasants in very deprived state.

Second impact of colonial policies was commercialization of agriculture in some areas where the peasants grew cash crops primarily cotton, jute, tobacco, sugarcane, indigo etc most of which served as raw material for British industries. However, commercialisation proved beneficial only for the rich peasants and the moneylenders. It paved the way for usury and the poorer peasants depended heavily on the local moneylender for advance of credit, marketing of crops, loans during the lean seasons and paying land revenue. The moneylender who was usually the village merchant also acted as the agent for buying the produce of the peasant and for introducing and selling western manufactured goods like Manchester cloth. Poorer peasants virtually hypothecated their produce in advance to the moneylender. A large number of them remained in debt throughout their lives and many of them lost their lands. This resulted in de-peasanting in which a number of peasants lost their lands and were forced to become landless labourers.

Commercialization of agriculture meant that some land which was used earlier for growing food grains was now being used to grow cash crops. This required that food grain production in remaining areas should have increased to meet the demands of the country. However, no attention was paid to this aspect. The production of food grains either declined or did not grow to keep pace with the growth of population. During the period 1891-1947 population increase was .67% per annum while food grain production was .11% per annum. Primary reason for this was that the Government did not make any effort to improve agriculture. This task was left to the peasantry, who being in an impoverished state was not able to do much. The normal rate of production was already at subsistence level and whenever an area was affected with droughts and crop failure, it resulted in famine. There were about thirty four famines during the period 1898 to 1908 in which total loss of life was about 1.5 crores.

If the condition of agriculture in the colonial rule was bad, the condition of industry was worse. The country suffered what has been termed as de-industrialization. When the British came to India, India was manufacturing all the goods it needed and Britain had almost nothing which it could export to India. On the other hand Indian goods were valuable items of commerce having a reasonable market in England. Hence India had a favourable balance of trade. At that time, the East India Company was facing competition from other trading companies of Europe particularly the French and the Dutch as well as the Indian merchants. This placed the craftsmen in a better bargaining position. However, the Company soon eliminated this competition and acquired a monopoly in trading of these goods. Now the artisans and craftsmen had no option but to sell their goods to the Company and its servants at lower rates. Apart from hardships to the artisans, this also reduced the possibility of capital accumulation and improvement in technology. On the other hand capital accumulation took place in England where it was used to power the Industrial Revolution.  Industrial revolution ended the British market for Indian products as it was not possible for artisans to compete with economic large scale factory production. Soon these industrial products found their way to India and the Indian market for artisans was destroyed as well.  

R.C.Dutt and Madan Mohan Malviya in their note of dissent to the Indian Industrial Commission pointed out that export of finished industrial products greatly increased in the British rule; for example value of import of Manchester cloth increased from 96 lakh sterling in 1860 to 27 crore sterling in 1900.This increase could have been possible only due to wiping out of indigenous weaver’s cloth. The census figures also pointed out to the decline in industrial activities. As per the census figures, the male work force in agriculture increased from 65% in 1881 to 72% in 1931 while the proportion in industry declined from 16% to 9%.

The theory of de-industrialization has got a mixed response from European authors. Some imperial apologists like Lord John Maynard Keynes have accepted that India was de-industrialized but have stated that this was in the interest of both Britain and India in which Britain focused on production of industrial goods while India focused on agricultural products. This view was in keeping with the international division of labour in which the metropolis was to produce industrial and high value goods while the colony was to produce agricultural and low value goods. Obviously this was discriminatory and unfavourable to the colony.

However some other writers have contested the fact the India suffered deindustrialization. For example Morris David Morris attributes the increase in import of Manchester cloth to the increase in population and changed consumption habits and also states that this increase did not displace indigenous weaver’s cloth. Similarly Daniel Thorner, after analyzing the data of census from 1881 to 1931 points out that the deindustrialization was nominal. According to him increase in agriculture and related activities for the said period was about 2% and decline in industry and trade was about 3%. However, even Thorner does not deny the fact that the Indian industry has already suffered substantial damage by 1881 when the first reliable all India census was conducted.

Despite all the odds Indian industry found ways to establish itself though in a very small way. The Indian trading class which had accumulated some capital made efforts to venture in the industrial field. Initial attempts were in cotton textiles and the first Indian textile mill “The Bombay Spinning Mill” was set up in Bombay in 1854 (a textile mill was set up earlier at Fort Gloster near Kolkata in 1818 but it was a failure). However since then up to the time of First World War, the growth of Indian industry was extremely slow. The Government relaxed some control during war period due to its war time requirements. The fledgling industry took advantage of the situation and made rapid progress during the two world wars and in the inter war period. However, despite all these efforts the growth was very slow even in the last years of the colonial rule. As per an estimate, ratio of industrial sector’s share to the net domestic product was 12.7% in 1900-04, 13.6% in 1915-19 and 16.7% in 1940-44. Thus India remained predominantly agrarian. During all this period Britain profited from this de-industrialization of India. This was evident in the per capita income of two countries. In 1860s Dadabhai Naroji calculated India’s per capita income to be Rs.20 per annum. In England in 1870, the per capita income was 24.4 sterling which was equivalent to Rs.568/-.

All over the world, Industrial revolution ended the role of individual artisans. However, in England and other European countries the loss of craftsmen was compensated by the growth of industry and factory system. In India, the colonial policies did not allow the industry to grow freely and hence India could not become a fully industrialized country. It did not remain pre-capitalist as its artisan based mode of industrial production shattered and neither could it become industrialised. It became something in between; subordinate and heavily dependent on the British economy. 

Colonialism: A Theoretical Perspective

         While studying the Indian National Movement, we often come across the term ‘colonialism’. It is often mentioned that the freedom struggle was directed against the colonial rule. Hence before we look into various events and aspects of the national movement it is important to understand the term ‘colonialism’ and various aspects of its nature.

             

              Colonialism is a system in which one country is subjugated by the other. The country which subjugates is referred to as the metropolis while the country which is subjugated is known as the colony. The subjugation is not only political but has economical and social dimensions.  Colonialism has been interpreted in different ways. One view is to see it as a traditional society which moves towards modernization under the colonial administrative structure. Sometimes it is seen as a transitional society; the transition being from a traditional pre-capitalist society to a modern capitalist society. These people believe that colonial societies would have graduated into modern capitalist societies had colonialism been given sufficient time. Still others believe that colonial society is a dualistic society in which the pre-modern and the modern exist side by side. Colonialism begins the task of modernization but leaves it midway leaving the process of modernization incomplete. Some writers do not prefer to go into these details and consider colonialism as nothing more than political subjugation of one country by the other.

Nature of Colonialism

            

             As can be figured from the above discussion, colonialism produces a society which is neither capitalist nor pre-capitalist. Feudal structures of the pre-colonial period under went a change but did not turn completely into capitalist. An example of this is the change in agrarian relations in India. Jagirdari system of the Mughal period gave way to the Permanent and Ryotwari settlements in the colonial period. Land became a private property and was freely brought and sold. Hence the agrarian system did not remain pre-colonial and acquired some traits of capitalism but it did not completely turn into a capitalist system.

         Colonialism was in fact a system in which two countries were involved in unequal relations. Traditional or pre-colonial structure was linked with the world economy but not independently. The link was through the metropolis as its subordinate. The colonies did not have the option of moving out of this unequal relationship which was forced through the political control of the colony by the metropolis. An important aspect of colonialism was that it had one face in the metropolis and another in colony. While it helped in development of the metropolis as a modern industrially developed country; it under developed the colony by destroying the indigenous structure and making it dependent on the metropolis. In the colony, colonialism uproots old society and economy but the change does not give way to modern industrial society and economy. The colonial structure prevents economic growth in the colony as the economic activities are undertaken not for the benefit of the colony but for that of the metropolis.

Stages of colonialism

            Colonialism and the institutions associated with it did not remain unchanged during the colonial rule. These changed with time to adjust themselves as per the needs of the metropolis. These changes can be summarized in three stages of colonialism. The first stage is known as Period of Monopoly Trade and Direct Appropriation. In India the period corresponded from 1757-1813. The British East India Company acquired a monopolistic charter from the King of England which kept other British competitors away. Competition from Indian merchants and other European companies was eliminated by way of wars and acquiring political control over the Indian states. These wars required large sums of money. Money was also needed to pay for the Indian products which were to be exported to England. In normal situation this could have been done through goods manufactured in Britain or through bullion i.e. gold and silver. However, during this period manufacturing activities in Britain had not increased to such level so as to produce goods for export to India. Export of bullion from England also did not find favour with the British. Hence, money required to buy Indian goods was obtained from direct appropriation of the revenue generated from Indian territories. Appropriation of revenue also increased the profits of the company and dividends of shareholders. This appropriation became possible when the Company acquired control, first over Bengal and then over the rest of the country. An important feature of this stage was that there no was no significant change in administration except those which facilitated appropriation of revenue like the land revenue settlements. In social fields also there were no changes. This was because colonialism of this stage could be superimposed upon the existing structures without making significant changes. There was no need to do so until revenue was successfully sucked out through traditional methods of revenue collection.

            Second stage of colonialism is the Stage of Free Trade. Britain was undergoing industrial revolution and newly emerging capitalists wanted cheap raw materials for their industries as well as a market for their ever increasing products. This group attacked the policies of East India Company and wanted the colony to serve their interests which were different from those of East India Company. This led the British Government to control the activities of the Company by enacting a number of Acts like Regulating Act of 1773 and Pit’s India Act of 1784. By 1813, when another Charter Act was passed, the Company had lost most of its political and economic power. During this stage, India was to become the subordinate trading partner of Britain by exporting agricultural products and raw materials and importing industrially manufactured goods. In this stage the colony could not be exploited under the existing socio-economic structures hence important changes were made in the administration. Policy of Laissez faire or free trade was adopted and import duties on all the goods were either removed or reduced to nominal rates. This gave the British products a free run in the country. Free entry was also given to the British capitalists to develop plantations, trade, transport, mining and other modern industry in India. Railway was also developed as a cheap mode of transport and by 1905 about 45000 kilometers of railways was laid. Legal procedures and administration also underwent a change to make it more comprehensive and elaborate. The administration now penetrated deeper into the villages and far flung areas. However legal changes were limited to criminal law, law of contract and legal procedures. Personal laws were left unchanged. Changes in Education were also introduced primarily to prepare a working force to man lower levels posts in the administration and to develop a sense of loyalty among the subjects. Earlier methods of revenue extraction also continued during this period. This coupled with costly administration and maintenance of large military establishment put severe financial constraints upon the country.

            The third stage of colonialism is known as the stage of Foreign Investments and International Competition. This stage commenced in India from about 1860s. Now other countries were being rapidly industrialized. This led to an intense search for raw materials and markets. Exploitation from colonies also accumulated large amounts of capital which was finding exclusive and safe locations to be reinvested. Hence there was a vigorous search and competition for exclusive areas for raw materials, markets and investment of capital. As the position of Britain was being constantly challenged at the international level it now made vigorous efforts to retain its hold over India. Continuation of domination over India was essential for the British to keep out rivals and for safety of British investments. Another interest was the Indian army which served the global interests of the British even when the interests of India were not affected. Due to these compulsions liberal imperialist ideology gave way to the reactionary imperialist ideology. Earlier talk of training Indians for democracy and self government were given a good bye and all efforts were made to stifle nationalist feelings.

            Thus, extraction of surplus from India continued during the entire period of British rule though its methods changed over the years. Another thing that must be kept in mind is that these stages were not strictly demarcated with respect to time i.e advent of the next stage did not mean end of the earlier stage in all spheres of administration. Two stages could exist simultaneously compounding the burden on India. The impact of British rule was disastrous for India. However, the subject will be discussed in detail in the next article. 

Poverty Estimates for 2011-12: The Facts and the Debate-Part-II

            In the first part of this article we discussed some basic concepts about poverty and poverty line. In this part we will discuss methodology and recommendations of the Tendulkar Committee and the data regarding poverty estimates presented by the Planning Commission for the year 2011-12.  As per these estimates All India poverty lines have been drawn at Rs.1000/- per capita per month for urban areas and Rs.816/- per capita per month for rural areas. The percentage of people below poverty line has been estimated to be 25.7% in rural areas, 13.7% in urban areas and 21.9% for the country as a whole. The number of people below poverty line was estimated to be about 27 crores.

Report of Tendulkar Committee

            

              Tendulkar Committee perceived consumption poverty as the inability of the individual or household to satisfy a minimum basket of basic human needs that is expected to be reflected in some normative standard of living that should be assured to each individual/household. This is reflected through a poverty line basket (PLB). The PLB suggested by the Tendulkar Committee comprises of food items, fuel, clothing, footwear, education, medical expenses, entertainment and other foods and services. The Committee also suggested shares of various components in the consumption. For example in urban PLB cereal comprises 16.7% of the expenditure, milk 7.5%, edible oil 5%, sugar 2.3%, salt and spices 2.5%, fuel 12.2%, clothing 6.6%, education 3.2% and medical (institutional and non institutional) at 3.5%.

            

              The Committee calculated indexes statewise for both rural and urban areas. The Index for food, clothing, fuel, intoxicants and footwear was calculated on the basis of the expenditure incurred on a bundle of commodities some of which like wheat, rice, kerosene and sugar were considered to be provided through PDS. Index for cost of education per child and Index for cost for health facilities were calculated separately. On the basis of these indices, the Committee calculated an aggregate index and also calculated the poverty line as well as poverty percentage or the poverty Head Count Ratio for 2004-05. Calculations were made separately for all the states as well as the rural and urban areas. Poverty line and poverty Head Count Ratio were also calculated for All India for both rural and urban areas. For the year 2004-05, All India poverty lines were Rs.446.68 for rural areas and Rs.578.8 for urban areas. Poverty Head Count Ration for 2004-05 was 41.8% for rural areas and 25.7% for urban areas. The Committee also provided methodology for updating these poverty lines and Head Count Ratio.

Recent Data

            

                The present data fixes urban poverty line at Rs.1000/- per capita per month and rural poverty line at Rs.816/- per capita per month. On daily basis, these translate into Rs.33/- per day per person for urban areas and Rs.27/- per day per person for rural areas. These figures have been stated to be impractical. The figures have drawn wide criticism as being insensitive and impractical as the media repeatedly points out that it is not possible to have a single meal in the city in this amount.

            However, media statements do not always present the entire picture. An objective analysis of the present data would indicate that these figures are not that much far from reality as are being made out. The Planning Commission while presenting the estimates had stated that though daily figures could be worked out for arithmetical purposes, these figures are for a complete month and should be treated as such.

            Let us consider the data in the light of this statement. For an example, cereals form 16.7% of the total expenditure for urban poor. For Rs.33/- the proportion comes to a little more than Rs.5/- which appears illogical, but when we consider it for the whole month, the per capita expenditure on cereals comes to Rs.167/- which makes some sense. It makes more sense when the figures are considered for a family of five, in which case expenditure on cereals for the family comes to Rs.835/-. This figure would seem reasonable, particularly after considering the fact that a major part of the requirement of cereals for these families is met through PDS which provides an APL (Above Poverty Line) family at about Rs.7 per Kg and rice at Rs.10 per Kg. Rates for BPL (Below Poverty Line) families are even lower. Similarly, a number of services like medical treatment and education are either being provided by the Government free or at highly subsidized rates which reduce expenditure on this account.

            It could be said that only those items are in comfort zone which are provided in some way through Government agencies. In commodities which are to be procured from the open market, the situation is not that comfortable. This is true, but then, poverty line is not about a comfortable life, it is about sustenance, though a humane and dignified one. It is a tool to segregate, that section of people which does not have even those levels of income which could provide them basic amenities of life. Quite reasonably, this group needs to be segregated for providing support through various welfare schemes.

            One could argue that those marginally above these poverty lines are also in need of welfare schemes. This could again be very well be true but the question is who should be first beneficiary of any welfare schemes. Priority should start from the bottom. The most vulnerable and most deprived should be first beneficiaries. As per the present data, population below poverty line comprises 21.9% of the population. These people do not even have the income corresponding to the said poverty lines and it is reasonably fair that such people get the benefit of the welfare schemes in the first instance. Hence, the debate on quantification of poverty lines becomes irrelevant, particularly in view of the fact that the Rangarajan committee has already been constituted to revisit the issue. It would have been more fruitful if the debate had centered on ways to ameliorate the conditions of those below poverty line even by these standards. 

Poverty Estimates for 2011-12: The Facts and the Debate (Part-I)

            On 23^rd July, 2013 the Planning Commission released the data relating to poverty estimates for the year 2011-12.  The data was compiled on the basis of methodology laid down by Tendulkar Committee report which calculates poverty on the basis of Monthly Per Capita Expenditure. As per this data poverty has considerably declined from 37.2% in 2004-05 to 21.9% in 2011-12. The data fixes poverty line at Rs.816/- per capita per month in rural areas and Rs.1000/- per capita per month in urban areas. The data has been widely criticized in the media for being a statistical exercise with an insensitive and impractical approach. However, before forming an opinion on the subject it would be prudent to go into a little bit of details.

Poverty

            Literally, poverty is a condition of deprivation wherein the individual or the household is not able to meet its basic needs like adequate food, safe drinking water, sanitation facilities, health facilities, education and entertainment. Apart from income an important aspect in this regard is the availability and access to these services as higher income may not necessarily mean access to the basic services referred above. It would also depend on availability and accessibility to these goods and services for all sections of the society.

            United Nations defines poverty as follows, ““Fundamentally, poverty is a denial of choices and opportunities, a violation of human dignity. It means lack of basic capacity to participate effectively in society. It means not having enough to feed and cloth a family, not having a school or clinic to go to, not having the land on which to grow one’s food or a job to earn one’s living, not having access to credit. It means insecurity, powerlessness and exclusion of individuals, households and communities. It means susceptibility to violence, and it often implies living on marginal or fragile environments, without access to clean water or sanitation”          

            In view of the above definition, it would be evident that poverty is multi-dimensional. Apart from inequities in income, it also means inequities in availing of facilities and opportunities and inequities in social participation. Apart from being painful to the individual, these inequities are also harmful for the society. Due to its adverse effects, poverty reduction has been one of the most important goals of various international agencies including the United Nations who adopted poverty and hunger reduction as one of the eight Millennium Development Goals in which specific targets have been set for the Governments to be achieved by 2015.

Poverty Line

            Poverty Line is an economic benchmark of income required for maintaining a minimum standard of life. International agencies had earlier set the benchmark at one dollar per day, but the World Bank has now set the benchmark at $1.25 per day. As per World Bank data, 32.7% of the Indian population was below this benchmark in the year 2010. However, many of the countries have not accepted this poverty line and various Governments have calculated their own poverty lines as per their economic conditions.

In India, the earlier official poverty line was based on per capita consumption level. This was based on a bundle of commodities which was related to the consumption corresponding to specific number of calories in the year 1973-74. The number of calories was 2400 for rural areas and 2100 for urban areas. Later poverty estimates were also broadly based on this criterion. However, this was not found to be reflecting the real situation as consumption patterns had changed over the years. Further, these poverty lines were adjusted for inflation by using different indices which caused the lines to move in different ways and it was felt these did not reflect the actual situation. Hence a need was felt to reassess the entire situation. Therefore, the Planning Commission appointed a committee in 2005 under Chairmanship of Professor Suresh Tendulkar in to revisit the entire issue. The committee submitted its report in 2009 and its recommendations were accepted by the Planning Commission.

However, many people were not in agreement with the findings of Tendulkar committee and suggested that poverty lines suggested by the Committee were too low. In view of these representations, the Planning Commission constituted one more committee in June, 2012 under the Chairmanship of Dr.C.Rangrajan to review the methodology for measurement of poverty. However, as the report of this committee will be available only in 2014, the present estimates for the year 2011-12 have been calculated on the basis of the methodology suggested in Tendulkar Committee report.

 (To be continued in Part-II)

.