We need grading of poverty, not a line of poverty
By Manohar Manoj
The way people as well as media are terming the poverty parameter, a matter of mockery, it raises several questions over the both planning commission as well as over the government. After all, what way and which way the government and planning commission are thinking about poverty in the country. Do they just want to take credit of so called reduced numbers of poor in statistical terms or they really feel that the changing fortune of India's economy in last two decades has been successfully brought sizeable numbers of poor people in the non poor category. I think, neither by going emotionally nor by over exposing this issue will in fact help the cause of poverty in the country.
We must accept these facts despite consistent operation of anti poverty programs as well as the high growth era in the country, a large share of country's population have not been brought out of the clutches of poverty. So, we have to think seriously on calculating the present status of poor people in India first and secondly we have to redesign and reshuffle all existing poverty alleviation programs so that it can be implemented in more effective and impactful manner.
What the debates are going on over the poverty parameter on several forums in the country, it sounded that the amount of per capita income whether daily or monthly or on a family basis what the government has fixed, is such a meager amount, it could not carry those people who are living just little bit beyond this line in several poor benefit programs. People immediately relate this parameter with the level of current inflation and price rise. Though, people from the planning commission consistently trying to clarify that the prevalent poverty parameter has not been taken as the yardstick for any welfare and anti poverty programs of the country, it is just an estimation of how much percentage of people are under BPL category and how much are under APL category. But here a question arise, after all why government opens out the figure of poverty, if it has no purpose for its several schemes and programs and also as a symbol of a better life standard, One must agree or not , this UPA government clearly wants to use poverty data, as one of its major success over socio economic front. But, on the contrary, people take it as a fun against poor people on behalf of government.
The way the various spokespersons of the ruling party UPA tried to save this parameter of poverty that poor can easily eat within this stipulated below poverty line daily income amount, people became more angry over their statements and it consequently brought Planning commission also more under attack. Actually these people were trying to give credit to their government, that see our government has lowered down the percentage of poor people, especially in their ruling period of 2004 to 2012. But ultimately it worked opposite to them.
Whatever the argument given by planning commission, it raises many questions over the very concept of poverty and the adoption of its parameter in the country.
first of all, as per the poverty data which is said to be have very low per capita income, still 29 crore and about one fourth population of country are living below poverty line, as confiscated by government of India. Nobody is even talking about them, neither media nor the spokespersons of congress party. It means with such a meager amount of poverty parameter, those 29 crore people are living just a hell's life. We don't say that any magic stick will abolish poverty of India overnights. But undoubtedly, a big question mark is being raised over the anti poverty slogan and anti poverty programs of this government.
The great garibi hatao slogan was given by one of tallest leader of ruling congress party Mrs. Indira Gandhi,around 42 year back, which is not a short period, it's a very big period for any government, but still we have 25 percent population as per govt. data, is living at below poverty line and UPA govt. is feeling proud of that.
Now we come over the issue of iimpact of our poverty alleviation programs of the country. In both pre 91 era and post 91 era, poverty alleviation program were there, whether through several govt. controlled schemes and programs in pre 91 era or high growth oriented poverty alleviation programs in post 91 era. But in both the era whether in pre 91 or in post 91 ,I think corruption, mismanagement and policy paralysis were always there.
But most significantly the UPA government which provided legal and constitutional orientation to many welfare and anti poverty programs of the country, the question arised, after all why they got failed. Why, the much sounded program MNREGA just proved to be a great fiasco. In country like India where corruption, leakages and mismanagement is so rampant, one cannot hope the ideals of MNREGA were fulfilled.
Ultimately we have to accept this fact, it was a notional blunder while drafting MNREGA scheme, first to provide 70 percent funds to be spent over wage component and second majority of work were allotted for kind of earth work and minor irrigation. This proved to be shier misuse of money. It was neither able to provide gainful employment to the worker nor it created reproductive asset to the community and above all it hampered the economy in form of high fiscal deficit and soaring inflation rate accompanied with very high food inflation. If this money meant for MNREGA were diverted to exclusively rural infrastructure programs viz. creation of pucca road, establishing source of non conventional energy , on the construction of schools and hospital building, on the construction of canals, sewage, community halls, ponds, food processing industries etc. these things would have provided impetus to the country's rural economy.
Though the economists and also government do not take trickledown theory, an affective mode of attacking on poverty, but in reality this theory has eliminated poverty particularly in post 91 era. All govt. sponsored program whether in pre 91 era or in post 91 era were not upto the mark while attacking poverty.
In post 91 era , particularly in 2000 decade the high growth era has somewhat provided employment in metropolitan and big urban industrial centers and the money order and remittances have played a greater role in availing purchasing power to the rural laborers.
So our planners have to decide which way they want to address poverty. In country like India, where delivery system is so weak, where bureaucratic cost of any scheme is so high, where masses of laborers are unskilled and government schemes have consistently been failure, here only one option left that is to redesign and reshuffle the all poverty alleviation programs in such a way, where market can be utilized as an effective tool under high quality regulatory authorities.
Talking about poverty, it cannot be addressed in better way than providing gainful employment followed by massive coverage of social security network, big investment over all kind of rural infrastructure and optimum public expenditure over all human development items like education and health.
So we need correction of programs like MNREGA, loan waiver and food securities. Talking over poverty front, we should not forget that we as country are not polarized social class.
Among the poor there are so many categories, like we have middle farmers, small farmers, marginal farmers, landless laborer etc. in the same way we have various category of laborers, we have complete manual laborers, unskilled laborers, semi skilled and skilled laborers. Roughly we have two class organized laborers and unorganized laborers in the country with a ratio of 15:85. Under these categories, it would be very rationale to categories the poor of India into many grade, very poor, semi poor, poor, lower middle, and middle income. Because when we discuss, the life standard of any people we have take into account their ratio of spending over both food articles and non-food articles. Spokespersons of congress party discuss about cost of a thali, not of clothing, bus fare, room rent, education cost, medical expenses etc. I think one who even spends 75 percent of his expenses over food, he is among poorest of poor, whereas there are large numbers of people in the country, who even have no enough income to even meet out their minimum food expenses.
So while discussing poverty parameter we consider income area, not the consumption area. In this era of high inflation, the quantity of income will not tell the actual scene of poverty of India.
Without going in the controversies over tendulkar committee or MS Ahluwalia committee or newly constituted Rangrajan committee, it is better to frame several grades of poor people in the country, which will provide more accurate socio economic picture of poverty in India. This grading will in fact help the planners in chalking out grade wise anti poverty or employment generational or small entrepreneurial schemes and program and at the same time it will avert the controversy over the demarcation line of APL and BPL. p
By Manohar Manoj
The way people as well as media are terming the poverty parameter, a matter of mockery, it raises several questions over the both planning commission as well as over the government. After all, what way and which way the government and planning commission are thinking about poverty in the country. Do they just want to take credit of so called reduced numbers of poor in statistical terms or they really feel that the changing fortune of India's economy in last two decades has been successfully brought sizeable numbers of poor people in the non poor category. I think, neither by going emotionally nor by over exposing this issue will in fact help the cause of poverty in the country.
We must accept these facts despite consistent operation of anti poverty programs as well as the high growth era in the country, a large share of country's population have not been brought out of the clutches of poverty. So, we have to think seriously on calculating the present status of poor people in India first and secondly we have to redesign and reshuffle all existing poverty alleviation programs so that it can be implemented in more effective and impactful manner.
What the debates are going on over the poverty parameter on several forums in the country, it sounded that the amount of per capita income whether daily or monthly or on a family basis what the government has fixed, is such a meager amount, it could not carry those people who are living just little bit beyond this line in several poor benefit programs. People immediately relate this parameter with the level of current inflation and price rise. Though, people from the planning commission consistently trying to clarify that the prevalent poverty parameter has not been taken as the yardstick for any welfare and anti poverty programs of the country, it is just an estimation of how much percentage of people are under BPL category and how much are under APL category. But here a question arise, after all why government opens out the figure of poverty, if it has no purpose for its several schemes and programs and also as a symbol of a better life standard, One must agree or not , this UPA government clearly wants to use poverty data, as one of its major success over socio economic front. But, on the contrary, people take it as a fun against poor people on behalf of government.
The way the various spokespersons of the ruling party UPA tried to save this parameter of poverty that poor can easily eat within this stipulated below poverty line daily income amount, people became more angry over their statements and it consequently brought Planning commission also more under attack. Actually these people were trying to give credit to their government, that see our government has lowered down the percentage of poor people, especially in their ruling period of 2004 to 2012. But ultimately it worked opposite to them.
Whatever the argument given by planning commission, it raises many questions over the very concept of poverty and the adoption of its parameter in the country.
first of all, as per the poverty data which is said to be have very low per capita income, still 29 crore and about one fourth population of country are living below poverty line, as confiscated by government of India. Nobody is even talking about them, neither media nor the spokespersons of congress party. It means with such a meager amount of poverty parameter, those 29 crore people are living just a hell's life. We don't say that any magic stick will abolish poverty of India overnights. But undoubtedly, a big question mark is being raised over the anti poverty slogan and anti poverty programs of this government.
The great garibi hatao slogan was given by one of tallest leader of ruling congress party Mrs. Indira Gandhi,around 42 year back, which is not a short period, it's a very big period for any government, but still we have 25 percent population as per govt. data, is living at below poverty line and UPA govt. is feeling proud of that.
Now we come over the issue of iimpact of our poverty alleviation programs of the country. In both pre 91 era and post 91 era, poverty alleviation program were there, whether through several govt. controlled schemes and programs in pre 91 era or high growth oriented poverty alleviation programs in post 91 era. But in both the era whether in pre 91 or in post 91 ,I think corruption, mismanagement and policy paralysis were always there.
But most significantly the UPA government which provided legal and constitutional orientation to many welfare and anti poverty programs of the country, the question arised, after all why they got failed. Why, the much sounded program MNREGA just proved to be a great fiasco. In country like India where corruption, leakages and mismanagement is so rampant, one cannot hope the ideals of MNREGA were fulfilled.
Ultimately we have to accept this fact, it was a notional blunder while drafting MNREGA scheme, first to provide 70 percent funds to be spent over wage component and second majority of work were allotted for kind of earth work and minor irrigation. This proved to be shier misuse of money. It was neither able to provide gainful employment to the worker nor it created reproductive asset to the community and above all it hampered the economy in form of high fiscal deficit and soaring inflation rate accompanied with very high food inflation. If this money meant for MNREGA were diverted to exclusively rural infrastructure programs viz. creation of pucca road, establishing source of non conventional energy , on the construction of schools and hospital building, on the construction of canals, sewage, community halls, ponds, food processing industries etc. these things would have provided impetus to the country's rural economy.
Though the economists and also government do not take trickledown theory, an affective mode of attacking on poverty, but in reality this theory has eliminated poverty particularly in post 91 era. All govt. sponsored program whether in pre 91 era or in post 91 era were not upto the mark while attacking poverty.
In post 91 era , particularly in 2000 decade the high growth era has somewhat provided employment in metropolitan and big urban industrial centers and the money order and remittances have played a greater role in availing purchasing power to the rural laborers.
So our planners have to decide which way they want to address poverty. In country like India, where delivery system is so weak, where bureaucratic cost of any scheme is so high, where masses of laborers are unskilled and government schemes have consistently been failure, here only one option left that is to redesign and reshuffle the all poverty alleviation programs in such a way, where market can be utilized as an effective tool under high quality regulatory authorities.
Talking about poverty, it cannot be addressed in better way than providing gainful employment followed by massive coverage of social security network, big investment over all kind of rural infrastructure and optimum public expenditure over all human development items like education and health.
So we need correction of programs like MNREGA, loan waiver and food securities. Talking over poverty front, we should not forget that we as country are not polarized social class.
Among the poor there are so many categories, like we have middle farmers, small farmers, marginal farmers, landless laborer etc. in the same way we have various category of laborers, we have complete manual laborers, unskilled laborers, semi skilled and skilled laborers. Roughly we have two class organized laborers and unorganized laborers in the country with a ratio of 15:85. Under these categories, it would be very rationale to categories the poor of India into many grade, very poor, semi poor, poor, lower middle, and middle income. Because when we discuss, the life standard of any people we have take into account their ratio of spending over both food articles and non-food articles. Spokespersons of congress party discuss about cost of a thali, not of clothing, bus fare, room rent, education cost, medical expenses etc. I think one who even spends 75 percent of his expenses over food, he is among poorest of poor, whereas there are large numbers of people in the country, who even have no enough income to even meet out their minimum food expenses.
So while discussing poverty parameter we consider income area, not the consumption area. In this era of high inflation, the quantity of income will not tell the actual scene of poverty of India.
Without going in the controversies over tendulkar committee or MS Ahluwalia committee or newly constituted Rangrajan committee, it is better to frame several grades of poor people in the country, which will provide more accurate socio economic picture of poverty in India. This grading will in fact help the planners in chalking out grade wise anti poverty or employment generational or small entrepreneurial schemes and program and at the same time it will avert the controversy over the demarcation line of APL and BPL. p
No comments:
Post a Comment