The Indian middle class now owns more gadgets and is a little
better educated, but is still not as prosperous as has been believed to be,
says data from the 2011-12 round of the India Human Development Survey (IHDS)
conducted by the National Council for Applied Economic Research (NCAER).
The data, collected from 42,000 families, shows that with rising
incomes — the real median income grew from Rs. 28,200 per year in 2004-05 to
Rs. 37,500 in 2011-12 — asset ownership of the middle class has also increased.
Purchase of air-conditioners, colour TVs, refrigerators, cars,
laptops and credit cards has doubled over the last seven years, and cellphone
ownership has exploded from 7 per cent of the population in 2004-05 to 82 per
cent.
The Hindu is reporting exclusively from the findings of
India IHDS 2011-12, the largest independent nationally representative sample
survey . The annual income of the middle class remains relatively low. If the
Indian population is divided into five classes of equal sizes of 20 per cent
each, the poorest quintile (20 per cent) will earn between Rs. 1,000 and Rs.
33,000 annually as a household, the next 20 per cent will earn between Rs.
33,001 and Rs. 55,640. Families that earn between Rs. 55,000 and Rs. 88,800
annually would be in the third quintile and fall in the middle of India’s
income distribution. The fourth quintile will include families earning between
Rs. 88,801 and Rs. 1.5 lakh annually and those with income above Rs. 1.5 lakh
per year will comprise the richest 20 per cent population. According to the
Planning Commission, a family earning Rs. 55,000 annually would be at or just
above the urban poverty line for 2011-12.
Not all of the Indian middle class has access to all amenities
yet. According to latest data from National Council for Applied Economic
Research (NCAER), only 40 per cent of those in the middle class, comprising
households with annual income above Rs. 88,800 annually (an estimate suggested
by NCAER researchers), have piped water connections, and only 15 per cent get
three hours of water supply every day. Just over half of such families have
flush toilets and a similar percentage get 18 hours of electricity in a day.
Non-agricultural labour is still the most common job for men in
families earning between Rs. 88,801 to 1.5 lakh per year. For the richest 20
per cent population (above Rs. 1.5 lakh per year), however, salaried work
becomes the most common occupation.
By standard international definitions, like a consumption
expenditure of more than $10 per day, India would have no middle class because
everyone spending that much is in the top 5 per cent population of the country.
Economist Nancy Birdsall, founding president of Washington-based Centre for
Global Development, proposed a $4-$10 range for a class she described as the
“catalysing class,” which in India is made up of 150 million people or 12 per
cent of the population.
“I think it’s more useful to go beyond the income data, and look
at what we really mean when we talk about a global middle class,” said Dr.
Sonalde Desai, senior fellow at the NCAER and professor of sociology at the
University of Maryland. “This would means things like a college degree, fluency
in English, white-collar jobs among others,” she said.
The NCAER data shows that just 12 per cent of adult men in
2011-12 had a degree or diploma, only 8 per cent could speak fluent English and
14 per cent had some computer skills. Women had fewer skills than men in each
of these categories.
The
impressive gain by rural households in spite of the favouritism towards
non-primary activities appears real
The Indian economy has moved on a
high growth path since the mid-1980s. After a blip in growth between 1990-92,
liberalisation, initiated for aligning the Indian economy with the world in
1991, not only put the economy back on a higher growth path but also sustained
this growth till the 2000s. During the last few years, India has been the
second fastest growing economy in the world.
Despite the high growth over the
past two decades, concerns have been raised over the growth not being equally
distributed. Policy makers responded to these concerns arguing for
inclusiveness in the 11th Five Year Plan in 2007. How has the rapid growth
during the 11th Five Year Plan period helped in improving the income levels of
the most vulnerable Indian households?
Sharing of growth
The aggregate estimates routinely
brought out by the Central Statistical Organisation (CSO) show a “feel good
factor” — that real per capita income has been growing rapidly. But there is
little evidence on (a) how this growth has been shared among households in
rural India versus urban India and (b) whether households belonging to
different socio-religious groups have grown together. Three rounds of the
National Sample Survey Consumer Expenditure (NSS CE) surveys carried out
between 2004-05 and 2011-12 suggest an unprecedented rise in household
expenditure and a consequent decline in poverty. These estimates imply that
some benefits of growth have been shared by vulnerable households. But these
data do not clarify whether poverty has declined because of new social safety
net programmes or because vulnerable households have participated in the
general economic growth.
The recently-concluded India Human
Development Survey (IHDS) — a nationally representative survey of about 42,000
households conducted by researchers from the National Council of Applied
Economic Research (NCAER) and the University of Maryland examines changes in
the incomes of the households during the period of rapid economic growth,
2004-05 and 2011-12. It is the only nationally representative panel survey
covering the same households. During the two rounds of IHDS, besides a range of
outcome indicators, data on household income and its sources have also been
collected.
Though validation of the data is
still underway, we present some pointers based on preliminary analysis. The
median real income of the households from all sources had been about Rs. 28,200
in 2004-05; this increased to about Rs. 37,500 in 2011-12, which is an average
of 4.7 per cent annually. Unlike aggregate growth figures released by the CSO,
IHDS data allows calculation of household income by the place of residence of
households. Those IHDS calculations show for the first time that the real
average household income in rural India has increased 5.0 per cent annually —
almost twice the 2.6 per cent annual growth in urban India. This has resulted
in a significant narrowing of the gap in household income — from 2.26 times in
2004-05 to 1.97 in 2011-12. These figures are consistent with the growth of per
capita expenditure calculated from the respective NSS CE (61st and 68th rounds)
monthly per capita expenditure growth in the rural and urban sectors.
When we normalise the household
median income by the number of members in the household, the growth of income
in rural India is even more impressive — an average annual median per capita
income increase of 7.2 per cent, which is more than twice the rate experienced
by urban households (3.2 per cent annually). This story of growth at the
aggregate level is fascinating in itself because most of the changes during the
liberalisation phase have favoured the growth of non-primary activities. But
the impressive gain by rural households in spite of the favouritism towards non-primary
activities appears real and requires further investigation.
Further proof of growth
We note similar differences in
median income growth across different socio-religious groups that provide
further confirmation of the inclusiveness of the recent economic growth. In
IHDS surveys, we have defined six social and religious groups — high caste
Hindus, Other Backward Classes, Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims and Other Religious
Minorities. The highest growth in the median per capita incomes is reported for
Dalits (7.8 per cent annually) and OBCs (7.3 per cent), while the real median
income of high caste Hindus grew only at 4.6 per cent annually. The average
income growth of other vulnerable groups was also higher than that of high
caste Hindus. The income of Adivasis grew at 5.7 per cent annually while the
income of Muslims grew by 5.4 per cent.
A working plan
Our preliminary results point
towards the largest gains for the traditionally vulnerable households — rural
areas, Dalits, OBCs, Adivasis and Muslims. This narrowing of group differences
is all the more remarkable in the face of a slightly diverging overall income
distribution. Our preliminary calculations of per capita income inequality
suggest a small increase from a Gini ratio of 53 in 2004-5 to 55 in 2011-12.
The relatively greater progress of
vulnerable sectors despite this growing inequality seems to suggest that the
inclusive growth policy implemented during the 11th Five Year Plan may have
been working. While a much more rigorous analysis is required to delineate the
factors that have led to this, our conjecture is that some of the social sector
schemes like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Janani
Suraksha Yojana, the National Rural Health Mission et al. may have contributed
to this inclusive growth.
SOURCE: HINDU
No comments:
Post a Comment