EPW Article - India's Common People: Who Are They, How Many Are They, and How Do They Live?

A must read EPW article for those interested in growth, poverty, and inequality. Sengupta, Kannan and Raveendran (the same Sengupta who headed the Commission on the Unorganized Sector, also a great document) look at the socio-economic profile of the poor.

While, there has been a healthy debate on poverty measurement in India, this paper does not take up that discussion, but rather makes some powerful observations on the composition of the poor and vulnerable (he uses the term "common people") by using broad definitions of consumption based poverty.

Some findings - Using a broad measurement of 2X the official poverty line (consumption) SKR find that more then three-fourths are poor and vulnerable. Three quarters of the Indian population have on average, a daily per capita consumption expenditure of Rs. 20.

1. There is evidence which supports the view that despite high growth, specific social groups have remained poor and vulnerable.
88% of SC/ST are poor and vulnerable in 2004-05, a 2 percentage point drop from 1999-00.
Other Backward Classes saw a drop from 84.5% to 80% in the same time period.
Muslims saw a drop from 87% to 84.5% (however in 1993-94 it was 87.4%!!).

As one would expect, the Work Status of these groups is largely unorganized. In 1999-00 when data permitted identification of unorganized status, 83% of all unorganized workers were poor and vulnerable in 1999-00, and in 2004-05 is down to 79%. SC/ST, OBCs, and Muslims comprised 79% of the unorganized worker population, and in 2004-05 was down to 76%. The incidence of unorganized worker status is quite high among these groups as in 2004-05 we see 95% of SC/ST, 95% of Muslims, and 85% of OBC were of unorganized work status. These are all significantly higher then the 78% of unorganized status of all poor and vulnerable population.

2. Those social groups which are considered lower, have higher threshold levels for education required to cross poverty. To put this in another way, with the same level of education a person who is SC/ST or Muslim is more likely to be poor and vulnerable then someone of a 'higher' social status group.

SKR also show similar marginal decreases in illiteracy and education status over the past few years for SC/ST, OBC, and Muslims.

My $0.02:
Too often reports on poverty and inequality just focus on the dynamics of income distribution . I really enjoyed this paper because, just by attempting to define 'common people', we are able to see the intersection of social and economic deprivation in India, and how closely tied the two are.

SKR make a strong point of show how little improvements have been seen in the social groups of SC/ST, OBCs, and Muslims. Furthermore the unorganized status of these groups, highlight their vulnerability. While generating employment and wage is important, there is a need for an improved social security net and social protection to protect against the highly vulnerable nature of these groups.

There exists a need for multidimensional approaches which can provide insight into the nature of deprivation. Upon reading this study it is easy to observe that social identity and social deprivation is so closely linked with economic deprivation, that addressing economic deprivation alone would not translate into progress.

I love this statement - "And this is what India should strive for by pursuing an agenda of inclusive development and not just inclusive growth".