The Union territory of has the lowest POVERTY ratio among the Union territories in the country with just 1.72% of its Population living in poverty, according to a Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) report prepared by the NITI Aayog based on the National family Health survey – 4 done in 2015-16. Among the states, Kerala has the lowest poverty ratio with 0.71% whileBiharhas the highest poverty ratio with 51.91% of its population living in poverty.Tamil Naduhas the fourth lowest poverty index among states with 4.89%, after Kerala, Goa (3.76%) and Sikkim (3.82%).
Jharkhand has the second-highest poverty ratio with 42.16% of its population living in poverty followed by Uttar Pradesh (37.79%), Madhya Pradesh (36.65%) and Meghalaya and Assam 32.67%. Among the Union territories, Dadra & Nagar Haveli has the highest poverty ratio with 27.36% of its population living in poverty, followed by Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh (12.58%) and Daman & Diu (6.82%). Lakshadweep is the second least poor territory with 1.82% followed by Andaman & Nicobar Island (4.3%), Delhi (4.79%) and Chandigarh (5.97%).
Niti Aayog vice-chairperson DrRajiv Kumar, in his foreword to the report, said the MPI was prepared using the globally accepted and robust methodology developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
The index was prepared based on three key parameters – health, Education and standard of living. Health parameter comprises three indicators – Nutrition, child and adolescent mortality and antenatal care while education includes ‘years of schooling’ and ‘school attendance’ and standard of living includes cooking fuel, sanitation, drinking water, electricity, housing, assets and bank account.
Tamil Nadu fared better in several indicators including electricity, school attendance and cooking fuel.
Niti Aayog used the Alkire-Foster (AF) methodology to prepare the index. The AF methodology is a general framework for measuring multidimensional poverty that identifies people as poor or not poor based on a dual cut off counting method. The first order cut-off within each component indicator is applied to determine which person is ‘deprived’ in that indicator. The information across all indicators is then aggregated to arrive at a deprivation score for each individual.
The second order cut-off is then applied to identify the individuals, who are multidimensionally poor. The methodology is an extension of the widely acceptedFoster-Greer-Thorbecke(FGT) class of poverty measures and has a range of technical and practical advantages that make it favourable for use in nonmonetary poverty estimation, said the report.
However, experts pointed out that Niti Aayog used the data collected for a different purpose to prepare a multi-dimensional poverty index. Generally, monetary measurements are used to measure poverty. The monetary measurements will give a clear picture of whether the individual earns enough to feed himself and his family members with adequate food and meet his and family members necessary calorie requirements.