Indian Poverty during the 1990s: Resolving Methodological Issues from the 55th NSS Round
AbstractThe fieldwork for the 61st National Sample Survey (NSS) has recently been completed and Indian poverty estimates for 2004/05 are currently being calculated. We revisit the debate over the 55th NSS round, which produced incomparable poverty estimates due to a change in the recall period used in the survey. The adjustment methods of Sundaram and Tendulkar (2003a; 2003b); Deaton (2003a and Drèze 2006); and Kijima and Lanjouw (2003) are analysed, and the underlying assumptions of each method are probed. We conclude that the use of the Employment/Unemployment surveys is not valid, reject the assumption of a stable Engel curve but cannot reject the assumption that returns to factors are constant. With the caveat that there has been no structural shift in the relationship between income and expenditure, we accept Kijima and Lanjouw's adjustment method. This implies that poverty reduction during the 1990s was considerably slower than prior to the 1991 economic reforms.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by The Australian National University, Australia South Asia Research Centre in its series ASARC Working Papers with number 2006-07.
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Crawford Building, Lennox Crossing, Building #132, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Web page: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/acde/asarc/
More information through EDIRC
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2006-07-15 (All new papers)
- NEP-CWA-2006-07-15 (Central & Western Asia)
- NEP-DEV-2006-07-15 (Development)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Angus Deaton & Alessandro Tarozzi, 2000. "Prices and poverty in India," Working Papers 213, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Research Program in Development Studies..
- Dollar, David & Kraay, Aart, 2002.
" Growth Is Good for the Poor,"
Journal of Economic Growth,
Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 195-225, September.
- Angus Deaton and Jean Drèze & Jean Drèze, 2002.
"Poverty and Inequality in India: A Reexamination,"
107, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
- Datt, Gaurav & Ravallion, Martin, 2002.
"Is India's economic growth leaving the poor behind?,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
2846, The World Bank.
- Gaurav Datt & Martin Ravallion, 2002. "Is India's Economic Growth Leaving the Poor Behind?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(3), pages 89-108, Summer.
- Chris Elbers & Jean O. Lanjouw & Peter Lanjouw, 2003. "Micro--Level Estimation of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 355-364, January.
- Tarozzi, Alessandro, 2007.
"Calculating Comparable Statistics From Incomparable Surveys, With an Application to Poverty in India,"
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics,
American Statistical Association, vol. 25, pages 314-336, July.
- Alessandro Tarozzi, 2004. "Calculating Comparable Statistics from Incomparable Surveys, with an Application to Poverty in India," Econometric Society 2004 North American Winter Meetings 280, Econometric Society.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.