Poverty the other factors that provide supplementary information

Poverty is one
of the main problems which have attracted enough attention of sociologists and
economists. It indicates a condition in which a person fails to maintain a
living standard adequate for his physical and mental efficiency. It is a
situation people want to escape. It gives rise to a feeling of a discrepancy
between what one has and what one should have. The term poverty is a relative
concept. It is very difficult to draw a demarcation line between affluence and
poverty. Poverty is one of the most critical issues being faced by any economy.
It has been defined variously by the scholars.

 “Poverty is conventionally measured by the
income or expenditure level that can sustain a bare minimum standard of living”
(Bardhan, 1973). But measuring standard of living is a tricky issue.
Income/consumption levels though are taken officially to depict poverty but
such a measure of poverty needs to be supplemented by other factors that would
reflect access to minimum level of social amenities. Longevity, infant
mortality rate, health, nutrition, literacy, and access to primary schools, and
drinking water, etc. are the other factors that provide supplementary
information on poverty (Vani, 2004).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Poverty is
defined as the inability to obtain the minimum requirements of life, health and
efficiency due to very low income or insufficient assets. World Bank defines
poor person as “a person who earns less than 1.25 dollar per day”. It has to be
defined in relation to average living standards in a society and the social
norms and the customs acceptable to it at a point of time. Poverty is a state
where a person finds it unable to maintain a minimum socially accepted level of
standard of living. It is pointed as the root cause for low levels of health
and educational outcomes, poor access to clean drinking water and sanitation,
inadequate physical security, lack of voice, and insufficient capacity and
opportunity for mobility. Poverty has been described as a situation of
“pronounced deprivation in well being” and being poor as “to be hungry, to lack
shelter and clothing, to be sick and not cared for, to be illiterate and not
schooled. Poor people are particularly vulnerable to adverse events outside
their control. They are often treated badly by institutions of the state and
society and excluded from voice and power in those institutions.”

Poverty has
been described as a situation of “pronounced deprivation in well being” and
being poor as “to be hungry, to lack shelter and clothing, to be sick and not
cared for, to be illiterate and not schooled. Poor people are particularly
vulnerable to adverse events outside their control. They are often treated
badly by institutions of the state and society and excluded from voice and
power in those institutions.” According to ICMR, the minimum calories intake of
a person has been put at 2400 kilo calories per capita per day in rural areas
and 2100 kilo calories per capita per day in urban areas. The minimum calorie
intake for rural areas has been kept higher than that in the urban areas, as
rural people have to put in more physical effort than those living and working
in urban areas. Those who fail to secure the prescribed calorie intake levels
fall below poverty line and are defined as poor.

 

 

 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY.

 

The present study is carried
out with the following objectives

 

Ø To analyze the state wise Specific Poverty Lines for the year of
2011-2012.

 

 Ø    To identify the determinants
of poverty at macro and micro levels

 

Ø To analyze the trends in incidence of poverty Karnataka and all –
India .

 

 

Methodology of The Study.

 

The present study is based on Secondary data,
secondary data has been collected from Books , journals, Annual reports , and
internet sources.

 

Review Literature.

Murgal et
al., (2003) conducted study on measuring poverty in Karnataka as a regional
dimensional. Under this study they reported that Indian Planning Commission
(IPC) estimated poverty at national level by using detailed household
consumption and expenditure data from the NSSO, but IPC was unable to measure
poverty at regional levels due to inadequate sample size. In order to measure
poverty at regional level they made attempt that pooling of central and state
sample data to overcome the problems of limitation of sample size. They used
secondary information like HCR and PGI of state and central data to measure
poverty. They compared cumulative distribution and Lorenz curve of MPCE
separately for the rural and urban area of Karnataka. Their study concluded
that Gulbarga and Belagaum division had highest poverty ratio compare to any
other district of Karnataka. Rath (2003) noted that poverty line by Dandekar
and Rath (1971) was calculated on the basis of household consumer expenditure
survey of 1961-62 by NSSO. But from 1972 onwards, though NSSO carried out a
large sample consumer expenditure survey but the tabulated calorie data was not
published. Rather, in poverty determination, focus has shifted from calorie
based approach to income based approach. He examined a method of estimating
poverty on the basis of price indices. His study based on the NSSO data has
created a detailed price index structure for each state of India. It used
maximum individual commodities and subsequently he found deep disconnection
between income poverty and food consumption. Complexity of monetary poverty and
nutritional status has been observed. Increasing income and declining calories
intake among poor in many states has shown declining poverty incidence of
monetary poverty. The results of the studies based on price indices and those
of the expert group are noticeably different.

Sharma
(2004) using the planning commission poverty line, computed poverty and
inequality indices from the large sample surveys of NSS consumer expenditure
data. Rural and urban poverty estimates were presented in the study for the
period 1973/74-1999/2000. The author observed that the inter-temporal changes
in the poverty ratio were more influenced by the changes in per capita
consumption rather than class distribution. Inter-personal inequality in the
consumption distribution, measured by the Lorenz ratio, remained fairly stable
for a long period but showed signs of decline recently. The study dwells on the
quality of data on private consumption obtained from the National Sample
Surveys’ consumer expenditure vis-à-vis the private consumption expenditure in
National Accounts Statistics, particularly the recent changes in the method of
data collection in the former. The study also concluded that importance of
non-income indicators such as infant mortality rate and school enrolment in the
assessment of living standards and also reduction of poverty.

Anonymous
(2013) reported that Planning Commission has periodically estimated poverty
lines and poverty ratios for each of the years for which Large Sample Surveys
on Household Consumer Expenditure had 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
percentage of persons below the Poverty Line in 2011-12 has been estimated at
25.7 in rural areas, 13.7 in urban areas and 21.9 for the country as a whole.
The respective figures for the rural and urban areas were 41.8, 25.7 and 37.2
for the country as a whole in 2004-05. It was 50.1 per cent in rural areas,
31.8 per cent in urban areas and 45.3 per cent 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. 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 was concluded that the rate of decline
in the poverty ratio during the 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.

Vijaya et
al., (2013) conducted a multidimensional poverty analysis, using data collected
from the Karnataka Household Asset Survey (KHAS) to assess gender,
intra-household disparities in asset ownership and to construct an individual
level of multidimensional poverty measure for Karnataka. To measure
multidimensional poverty, they included four dimensions – education, living
standards, ownership of productive assets and empowerment. The study concluded
that, in Karnataka 25 per cent of the households were classified as multi-dimensionally
poor. The poverty rate among women was (71%) more than double the poverty rate
among men (30%).

 

 

Nature  Of  Poverty 
in Karnataka.

 

Percentage of people below
poverty line is 20.91%. Nutritional deficiency among children in Karnataka is
acute.It has failed in spreading the facilities of Bangalore’s development to
rest of the state. It remains one of the few states to have just one city,
Bangalore, with more than 1 million people. North Karnataka has remained
untouched by development.

 

These are the 10 poorest
states in India where poverty is in dominance. The Indian Government is trying
its level best to bring these states and their people to bring above the
poverty line.

 

Determinants
of Poverty at Macro and Micro levels

 

Poverty is regarded as a vicious circle.
It is the product of different causes. Poverty is a multi dimensional problem
and multiple factors are responsible for it. There are several factors which
causes poverty at micro and macro levels. Determinants of poverty are broadly
classified into 6 major categories which include (1) Personal factors: (a)
Sickness, (b) Mental disease, (c) Accident, (d) Idleness and extravagance and
(e) Demoralization. (2) Biological factors: Rapid growth of population is one
of the most important macro determinants of poverty. (3) Geographical factors:
(unfavorable climate weather, absence of natural resources and Natural
calamities also created poverty at micro and macro levels). (4) Economical
factors: i.e Backwardness of agriculture and unequal distribution of wealth.
(5) Social factors which include religion, caste, family size and type,
education levels, occupation, source of income and land holding. 6) Political
factors: Political elites are giving various popular slogans like ‘anti poverty
programme, ‘removal of unemployment’ or ‘Bekari Hatao’, ‘Garibi Hatao’ etc but
these slogans have not been translated into action.

 

The Concept of Poverty Line.

 

The Concept
or poverty line has been derived from the definition of poverty, which is
defined in absolute terms. The individual or family income of which is
not adequate to ensure them the minimum requirements of life (e.g. nutrition,
clothing and shelter) is stated to be the poverty line or more conservatively,
only food, a yardstick for socially decent life being the ultimate goal. It has
also been observed that the common man must be entitled to a minimum calorie
intake to guarantee him bare survival. Poverty line concept is
multi-dimensional (viz., income-poverty and non-income poverty). It gives not
only levels of Income consumption But also health and education, vulnerability
and risk; and marginalization exclusion of the poor from the mainstream of society.

 As pointed out by Tendulkar committee , the
concept of poverty is associated with socially perceived deprivation with
respect to basic human needs. For the year 2009-10, the planning commission has
defined the poverty line as Rs.22.40 per day in rural areas and 28.60 per
capita per day in urban areas. This translates to 672.8 per capita per month in
rural areas and 859.60 per capita per month in urban areas. In 2004-05 the
percentage of people living below poverty line was 33.3%.in 2009-10 it was 23.6%.
the percentage of people living below poverty line in Karnataka has come down
by 9.7% in the estimate of poverty for 2009-10, released by the planning
commission. in 2004-05,the percentage of people living below poverty line was
33.3%.in 2009-10,it was 23.6%.in Karnataka, there were over 1.42 crore people
living below poverty line in 2009-10,down from over 1.86 crore in 2004-05.while
the poverty rate in rural

Data Analysis And Discussion

 

The
following tables depicts the state wise Specific Poverty Lines for the year of
2011-2012

Table-1
State Specific Poverty Lines for 2011-2012

Sl.No

States

 
Monthly per capital (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

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

1.00

 

Note : Computed as per
Tendulkar Method on Mixed Reference Period(MRP)

Source:Government of India
Planning Commission 2013.

 

The
estimates of state wise poverty lines for rural and urban arease for 2011-12
are given in table. The all India poverty line is the per capital per month
expenditure that corresponds to the all india poverty ratio. Poverty in India
is a hurdle for economic prosperity. It also indicates the monthly per capita
among rural and urban people in different states of India. The monthly per
capita amongst urban people is highest ie 1,302 Rupees in Nagaland when
compared to other states where as monthly per capita amongst rural people is
least in Odisha when compared to other states. The Government s at the state
levels should initiate measures to improve the income level of the people.

 

 

Table
:2: Poor Estimated by Tendulkar Method using Mixed Reference

Period
(MRP)

Year

Poverty Ratio %

Number of poor’s
in million

Rural

Urban

Total

Rural

 Urban

Total

1993-94

50.1

 31.8

 45.3

328.6

 74.5

 403.7

2004-05

41.8

25.7

37.2

326.3

 80.8

 407.1

2011-12

25.7

13.7

 21.9

216.5

52.8

269.3

Annual Average Decline: 1993-94 to
2004-05 (Percentage points per
annum)

0.75

 0.55

 0.74

Annual Average Decline: 2004-05 to
2011-12 (Percentage points per
annum)

2.32

1.69

 2.18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source : Anon, (2013 a)

 

Tablet.3: Trends in
Incidence of Poverty: Karnataka and All-India

Karnataka
 

Year
 

Rural
Sector
 

Urban
Sector
 

Combined
 
 

%of poor

No of poor
(million

poor

No of poor
(million

%of poor

No of poor
(million

1973-74

55.14

12.84

52.01

4.19

54.34

17.03

1993-94

29.88
(56.60)

9.60

40.14
(34.20)

6.05

33.16
(49.50)

15.65

2004-05

20.80
(37.50)

7.51

32.60
(25.90)

6.38

25.00
(33.40)

13.89

2009-10

15.82
(30.81)

5.87

23.54
(18.34)

5.09

18.52
(26.46)

10.87

All India
 

1973-74

56.44

261.29

49.23

60.31

54.93

321 .60

1993-94

37.27
(50.10)

244.03

32.36
(31.80)

76.34

35.97
(45.30)

320.37

2004-05

28.30
(41.80)

220.90

25.70
(25.70)

80.79

27.50
(37.20)

301.72

2009-10

22.42
(36.50)

184.95

19.27
(19.80)

67.33

21.57
(31.99)

253.28

Sorces; Karnataka economic survey

 

The above table shows that changes in status of poverty during the
period of 1973-74 to 2009-10 Rural poverty in Karnataka has declined by 39%
during 1973-74 to 2009-10, which is higher by 5% as compared to the decline at
the all-India level. The number of rural poor also declined over the period.
The decline in number of rural poor in Karnataka between 1973-74 and 2009-10
was 54% which is almost double that of the all-India decline of 29%. Incidence
of poverty has always been less in rural Karnataka than the corresponding
estimate for the Country as a whole. Deprivation in the urban sector too
declined but at a lesser extent (as compared to rural sector) both in Karnataka
(28 %) and India as a whole (30 %) between 1973-74 and 2009-10. The decline in
the poverty ratios was not sufficient to neutralize the growth in urban
population. Hence, the number of urban poor has increased both in Karnataka and
all-India between1973-74 and 2004-05.However between 2004-05 and 2009-10, a
decline is seen in the number of poor and decline is greater in Karnataka (20%)
as compared to All-India (17%). Incidence of urban poverty is much higher in
Karnataka than in India as a whole for all the years. The extent of deprivation
as measured by headcount ratio in Karnataka is 31% in rural areas, 18% in urban
areas and 26% for the State as a whole. The corresponding figures for all India
are 37% in rural, 20%-and 32% for the Country as a whole.

 

Conclusion

Karnataka has initiated various poverty alleviation programmers in both
rural and urban areas. While these programmers have resulted in a marked
decline in the number of the state’s poor, much remain to be done to address
regional and social variations in poverty. Towards ensuring food security to
its citizens, the state operates an extensive food distribution system to
provide basic foods with a focus on those who are below the poverty line. The
state has also recently completed an elaborate exercise to weed out fake ration
cards and to enhance the targeting of the public distribution system. The state
has also established institutions to provide affordable housing to the poor.
Promotion of livelihood opportunities through modernizing agriculture, establishing
rural industries, and skill up gradation be considered as effective strategies.

 

x

Hi!
I'm James!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out