OPHIOxford Poverty & Human Development InitiativeDepartment of International DevelopmentQueen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford www.ophi.org.uk

Multidimensional Measurement of Poverty

16 June 2008

India: Dataset

National Family Health survey 2005/6 dataset N=79,380

We are using the data for rural areas only (N=43,789)

Here we are comparing M0 with BPL status, which is available only for rural populations.

Later we will compare a different M0 (with empowerment) with national income poverty.

India: ComparisonsComparison Indicators:1) Income Poverty Line (drawn from NSS dataset)2) Whether or not respondent possesses a ‘Below

the Poverty Line (BPL)’ card. (available for rural only)

BPL: 13 dimensions, 5 responses 0-4. Aggregate across domains (total score out of 52) and set a poverty cutoff across that by area.

2 criticisms of BPL (2002 BPL Census – proxy targeting):1) data quality subject to corruption2) construction of index arbitrary (cardinal, = wts)

Jalan & Murgai 07, Sundaram 03 EPWMisclassification of 49% (AP, 75%)

roffcut

jiji SIS

13

1

India: Comparison M0 and BPL

M0 (10, equal wts) BPL Indicators (13, equal weights)Land and House Ownership How much land do you own?

Dwelling Structure What kind of house do you have?

Food Habits How much food do you have?

Sanitation Facility Bathroom Access

Assets Consumer goods you own

Maximum HH Education Maximum education in the family

How many clothes do you have? 

Existence of Child Labor Labor status in the family

Occupation Livelihood situation

Status of Children The status of children in the family

Have a Bank Account What kind of loans do you have?

Migration in the family

What do you want from the Government?

Indicators & Cutoffs (from BPL)

Variable Poverty ThresholdLand and House Ownership Land holding < 1 Bigha and does not own a house

Dwelling Structure Kaccha house (made of mud and low quality material)

Food HabitsNever or infrequently consume pulse or beans or dard green leafy veggie, and never or occasionally consume any protein

Sanitation FacilityIf the facility is Pit Latrine – without slab, No Facility – uses bush/fiend, composting toilet, dry toilet, others

AssetsDoes not have any of the following – TV, refrigerator, motorcycle, car, mattress, chair, table, computer

Maximum HH Education If highest education level in family < 5th grade

Existence of Child Labor UNICEF guidelines

OccupationThe whole family labor status is (Agricultural laborer) or (Plantation laborers) or (Laborers) or (Other (new workers seeking job) or (None (workers not reporting))

Status of Children

if at least one child aged between 5-18 in the family does not attend school due to the following reasons – (Required for household work) or (Required for work on farm) or (Required for outside work) or (Costs too much) or (Required for care of sibling) or (Other)

Have a Bank Account Does not have one

% of Households Deprived Indicator Number H

Land & House Own 2145 5%

Dwelling Structure 8123 19%

Food Habits 4849 11%

Sanitation Facility 33559 77%

Assets 12542 29%

Maximum HH Education

Existence of child labor

Occupation

Child Status

Have bank account

13112

6030

13499

3882

29126

30%

14%

31%

9%

66%

H and M0 for different k values

k

# of

Poor H M0

On average

poor in…

1 40027 91% .29 3.2

2 33419 76% .27 3.6

3 24872 57% .24 4.1

4 16081 37% .18 4.8

5 8320 19% .10 5.5

6

7

8

9

10

3218

803

113

13

0

7%

2%

0

0

0

.05

.01

.00

.00

.00

6.3

7.2

8.2

9.0

10

M0 Example:

• With equal weights

• With k = 4

• Compared to BPL and Income Poverty

• Decomposed by State

• Decomposed (after k applied) by Dimension

Also, Raj. & HP – BPL quex is accurate

AP: Murgai found 75% error in non-poor

Statewise Decomposition – examplesHP: All relatively close (rank -3)

AP: BPL>>M0 (rank -12)Rajasthan: M0>>BPL (rank +19)

(BPL, not decomposable)