IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/isbchp/978-981-10-6274-2_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Poverty, Inequality and Relative Deprivation Among Northeastern States of India: Evidence from NSS

In: Inequality, Poverty and Development in India

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammad Kashif Khan

    (University of Hyderabad)

  • Balakrushna Padhi

    (Jawaharlal Nehru University)

Abstract

One of the foremost objectives of post-independence Indian planning has been to eradicate poverty, reduce inequality, thus improving the lives of those battered by deprivation and suffering. With some of the initiatives by government, presently Indian economy is experiencing higher growth since last two decades of new economic policy regime. So it is an appropriate time to review and examine the precise impact of reform process on poverty, inequality and deprivation. The objective of this present study is to examine poverty, inequality and relative deprivation among northeastern states of India during 2004–05 (61st Round) and 2011–12 (68th Round) of NSSO’s Consumer Expenditure Survey Rounds data. This chapter used headcount ratio to measure poverty, relative deprivation index to understand the level of deprivation among the northeastern states of India. In addition, we have used Gini Coefficient for inequality prevalence. Our analysis depicts that the headcount poverty ratio of Tripura has highest in rural northeastern states, which has worse than national averages in 2004–05. Results also divulge that states like Sikkim, Mizoram, Tripura and Meghalaya have less than 10% poverty level in 2011–12 in urban area. The highest reduction in poverty has shown in rural Tripura during 2004–05 to 2011–12. The urban poverty is lower for all the states than rural area. Further results of relative deprivation show that, only Tripura is relative deprived state in rural whereas Sikkim and Manipur in Urban during 2004–05. The number of relative disadvantages states has increased in 2011–12 for both rural and urban. The highest relative disadvantages are in Arunachal Pradesh for rural, and in Manipur for the urban area during 2011–12. The highest relatively advantages are Nagaland in 2004–05 and Sikkim 2011–12 for both place in rural and urban among all the northeastern states. Relative disadvantages have increased or relative advantages have decreased during 2011–12 from 2004–05 in all northeastern states except for Tripura and Sikkim in rural. Inequality is lower in rural area as compare to urban area both periods except Sikkim in 2004–05 and Arunachal Pradesh both periods. Within rural area, the inequality has increased in 2011–12 for Sikkim and Nagaland whereas urban area two more states joined in this category, i.e. Tripura and Meghalaya. Oaxaca Blinder results show that sector, state and education play key role in differences of mean expenditure of poor and non-poor for endowment as well as return to endowment impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammad Kashif Khan & Balakrushna Padhi, 2017. "Poverty, Inequality and Relative Deprivation Among Northeastern States of India: Evidence from NSS," India Studies in Business and Economics, in: Utpal Kumar De & Manoranjan Pal & Premananda Bharati (ed.), Inequality, Poverty and Development in India, chapter 0, pages 207-221, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:isbchp:978-981-10-6274-2_11
    DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-6274-2_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Poverty; Inequality; Decomposition; Relative deprivation; Northeast India;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:isbchp:978-981-10-6274-2_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.