Poverty and Socio-Economic and Caste Census

The 1st ever post independence Socio-Economic and Caste Census (SECC) was conducted in 2011.  Government released the results of SECC-2011 in July 2015. SECC-2011 was first caste based census of Independent India. Earlier, caste based data was collected in 1931 Census. Government would use SECC-2011 data in all programmes such as NFSM, MGNREGA, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushalya Yojana etc and to identify the beneficiaries of direct benefit transfer (DBT) under the JAM (Jan Dhan-Aadhaar-Mobile) Trinity.

Objectives

The key rationale behind conducting a socio-economic and caste census was to assess the population that is actually below the poverty line (BPL).
Key Findings

• Out of the 24.4 crore households in India, 17.9 crore live in villages, which is 73.3% of all households in India. Out of these, 10.7 Crore households are deprived. Close to 30% rural households are landless and do the manual causal labour for bread winning.
• 13% live in one room huts (with kacha walls or roof) and 22% of them are from SC/ST category.
• More than half (56%) rural households in India are landless.
• 36% rural people are illiterate in India. This figure was recorded 32% in Census 2011. Out of the remaining 64% literate, around 20% have not completed primary school.
• 35% of urban Indian households qualify as poor Around 1.80 Lakh households are still engaged in manual scavenging for livelihood.

Discussion

Our country has always struggled to define who is poor. Despite of so many committees formed over the last many decades, there has never been a correct insight into who are the legitimate beneficiaries of the welfare schemes. Further, the official estimates of the poor have always tended to underestimate the number of poor in comparison to the estimates done by international organizations such as World Bank. In this context, the SECC data seems to quite enlightening and innovative. The use of various deprivation factors and automatic exclusion make it free from controversy. Further, its finding are different from what official estimations of rural as well as urban poor by different committees had been so far.

Extent of Rural Poverty

The key finding of the SECC-2011 is that rural India is poor. The main breadwinner of the 74.5% rural households in India earns less than Rs. 5000 per month. This ratio is even higher in states such as West Bengal (82.4%), Madhya Pradesh (83.52%) and Chhattisgarh (90.79%). However, SECC data needs to be adjusted for tendency of the rural people to not to tell correct income in fear of losing some entitlement benefits. However, despite we do all adjustment, there is no doubt that deprivation levels in rural India are still far too high. Extent of Urban Poverty According to SECC-2011, 35% of urban households are poor (below BPL). This figure is in striking contrast with the earlier estimates that ranged from 13.7% as per Tendulkar committee methodology, while 26.4% as per Rangarajan formula. Here, we should note that SECC numbers have greater credibility as the data has been collected via door-to-door enumeration. However, in urban areas also, there may be a tendency to understate income and asset ownership. How SECC can help? The decadal Census focuses on individuals while SECC has focussed on households. The data would be helpful for states and centre to target the most needy of the DBT and other schemes. Since SECC has also included the homeless, there is a chance that a large number of hitherto excluded people are brought into the welfare schemes of the government. Further, the caste data might be helpful on if the policy of reservation has really helped the most downtrodden of India. Further, with SECC data, the writing on the wall is clear. The SECC makes case for a paradigm shift in the economic policy making and budget allocation both by central and union governments. At the core of it, the policy making needs to be decentralized and include the most downtrodden people.

Questions & Answers

Poverty and SECC Link must be analyzed in the light of the below questions:

• Do we really need caste census data to estimate poor?
• What are the differences between the SECC and NSS consumption-based poverty estimates?
• Is SECC is an innovation to determine the poverty levels?
• What is the rationale for having poverty estimates based on consumption estimates?
• What necessitates the conduction of SECC?

Do we really need caste census data to estimate poor?

Experts have stated that the SECC is an unreliable and time-consuming strategy there already exists a whole lot of information available through the National Sample Surveys on consumption expenditure, undertaken every five years—very useful for identification of the poor. T

Also the Tendulkar committee (2009) and the Rangarajan Committee (2014) have come out with poverty lines and NITI Aayog is in the process of making further improvements on them.

What are the differences between the SECC and NSS consumption-based poverty estimates?

In 2015, the government had released data from the Socio-Economic Caste Census (SECC) 2011 stating that SECC data will alone be enough to estimate poverty and deprivation. However, there already exists consumption-based poverty estimates using NSS (National Sample Surveys) data.

NSS-based estimates are per capita, while the SECC data refer to households.

The SECC would be important for the identification of beneficiaries of programmes while NSS-based estimates would be useful for assessing changes in levels of living at the macro level over time.

Is SECC is an innovation to determine the poverty levels?

In India, we have a long history of studies on the measurement of poverty. The methodology for the estimation of poverty used by the erstwhile Planning Commission was based on recommendations made by various expert groups.

In June 2012, the government of India appointed an expert group with C. Rangarajan as chairman to take a fresh look at the methodology for the measurement of poverty.

The Rangarajan expert group has gone back to the idea of separate poverty line baskets for rural and urban areas, unlike the Tendulkar Committee, which took urban poverty as a given and used it as the common basket for rural and urban households.

Poverty estimates provide the proportion and size of the poor population and their spread across states and broad regions. But they cannot be used for identification of the individual poor, which is necessary to ensure that the benefits of programmes and schemes reach only the deserving and targeted group.

With respect to the identification of the poor, BPL (below poverty line) censuses were conducted. The first two BPL censuses (conducted in 1992 and 1997) and the third BPL census was conducted in 2002.

Therefore, SECC 2011 is simply a continuing process and there is nothing new about it.

What is the rationale for having poverty estimates based on consumption estimates?

Firstly, it is the mindset of the people. According to people, being rich or poor is associated with levels of income.  Secondly, historically, the number of identified poor based on successive BPL censuses in rural areas has differed widely from the measured poverty. For example, the percentage of households identified as poor in the first BPL census in 1992 was nearly twice the poverty ratio estimated by the Planning Commission. Usually, the poor households identified through these censuses contain a mix of poor and non-poor, for which there could be several reasons. One of the main reasons behind such a mix-up is the fact that people know beforehand that the census is going to decide the status of the household as poor or non-poor, and therefore its entitlement. Thirdly, the deprivation criteria by themselves do not indicate the level of poverty. A judgement has to be made as to whether the number of deprivations taken together constitute a measure of poverty. This can be highly subjective.

What necessitates the conduction of SECC?

The only reason why a SECC becomes important today for India is it is broader and dynamic definition of poverty. The SECC measures deprivation along seven criteria — households with only one room with no solid walls and roof, those with no adult member aged 15-59, female-headed households with no adult male aged 15-59, those with differently abled members and no able-bodied member, SC/ST households, those with no literate member above the age of 25, and landless households deriving a major portion of their income from manual casual labour.

Such a broader outlook was not held before and therefore a SECC becomes important for the India today.