Tendulkar Expert Group (2009)

The Tendulkar Expert Group (2009): A Landmark Report on Poverty in India

The Tendulkar Expert Group (TEG), constituted in 2009 by the Planning Commission of India, played a pivotal role in redefining the understanding of poverty in the country. Chaired by renowned economist Dr. Suresh Tendulkar, the group’s report, released in November 2009, introduced a new poverty line and methodology, sparking debates and influencing policy decisions for years to come. This article delves into the key aspects of the TEG report, exploring its methodology, findings, and the subsequent impact on poverty measurement and policy in India.

The Need for a New Poverty Line

Prior to the TEG report, India relied on the poverty line established by the Lakdawala Committee in 1979. This line, based on a basket of essential goods and services, was criticized for being outdated and failing to capture the changing consumption patterns and living standards of the Indian population. The rise of new consumption patterns, including access to education, healthcare, and communication technologies, demanded a more comprehensive and contemporary approach to poverty measurement.

The TEG was tasked with developing a new poverty line that reflected the evolving realities of Indian society. The group aimed to create a more accurate and relevant measure that could effectively track poverty reduction efforts and inform policy interventions.

The TEG Methodology: A Multi-Dimensional Approach

The TEG adopted a multi-dimensional approach to poverty measurement, incorporating both consumption expenditure and nutritional intake. This departure from the earlier single-dimensional approach, solely focused on consumption expenditure, aimed to provide a more holistic understanding of poverty.

The TEG methodology involved the following key steps:

1. Defining the Poverty Line: The TEG defined the poverty line based on the minimum daily calorie requirement for different age groups and genders, taking into account the nutritional needs of the Indian population. This calorie requirement was then translated into a monetary value based on the cost of a basket of essential goods and services.
2. Consumption Expenditure Data: The TEG utilized data from the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) to assess the consumption expenditure of households across different income groups. This data allowed the group to identify households falling below the poverty line.
3. Nutritional Intake Data: The TEG also incorporated data on nutritional intake from the NSSO, focusing on the consumption of essential nutrients like protein, iron, and vitamins. This data helped to assess the nutritional status of households and identify those experiencing nutritional deprivation.
4. Weighting and Aggregation: The TEG assigned weights to both consumption expenditure and nutritional intake, reflecting their relative importance in determining poverty. These weighted scores were then aggregated to create a composite poverty index, providing a comprehensive measure of poverty.

Key Findings of the TEG Report

The TEG report presented a comprehensive analysis of poverty in India, highlighting significant findings:

• Lower Poverty Rates: The TEG report estimated that the poverty rate in India had declined significantly between 2004-05 and 2009-10, falling from 37.2% to 21.9% based on the new poverty line. This decline was attributed to economic growth and various poverty alleviation programs implemented by the government.
• Regional Disparities: The report revealed significant regional disparities in poverty levels, with states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Odisha exhibiting higher poverty rates compared to states like Kerala, Punjab, and Gujarat.
• Rural-Urban Divide: The TEG report also highlighted the persistent rural-urban divide in poverty, with rural areas experiencing higher poverty rates than urban areas. This disparity was attributed to factors like limited access to education, healthcare, and employment opportunities in rural areas.
• Nutritional Deprivation: The report emphasized the prevalence of nutritional deprivation, particularly among children and women, even among households above the poverty line. This finding highlighted the need for targeted interventions to address malnutrition and improve overall health outcomes.

Impact of the TEG Report: Debates and Policy Implications

The TEG report sparked significant debates and discussions on poverty measurement and policy in India. While the report was lauded for its comprehensive approach and updated methodology, it also faced criticism for certain aspects:

• Calorie Requirement: Some critics argued that the TEG’s calorie requirement was too low and did not adequately reflect the nutritional needs of the Indian population. This criticism led to calls for revising the calorie requirement and re-evaluating the poverty line.
• Weighting of Indicators: The weighting assigned to consumption expenditure and nutritional intake was also subject to debate, with some arguing that the weight given to consumption expenditure was too high.
• Data Limitations: The TEG report relied heavily on data from the NSSO, which was criticized for its limitations in capturing the true extent of poverty, particularly in remote and marginalized areas.

Despite the criticisms, the TEG report had a significant impact on poverty measurement and policy in India:

• Policy Formulation: The report provided a strong foundation for policy formulation, informing the design and implementation of various poverty alleviation programs.
• Targeting of Interventions: The TEG’s multi-dimensional approach helped to identify specific groups and regions facing higher poverty levels, enabling targeted interventions to address their unique needs.
• Monitoring and Evaluation: The new poverty line and methodology provided a framework for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of poverty reduction programs, allowing for adjustments and improvements based on real-time data.

The TEG Report: A Stepping Stone for Future Research

The TEG report, while a landmark achievement in poverty measurement, also highlighted the need for continuous research and refinement of poverty indicators. The evolving nature of the Indian economy and society necessitates regular updates to the poverty line and methodology to ensure accurate and relevant poverty measurement.

Future research should focus on:

• Updating the Calorie Requirement: Revisiting the calorie requirement based on current scientific evidence and dietary patterns of the Indian population.
• Expanding the Basket of Goods and Services: Incorporating new consumption patterns and essential goods and services, including access to education, healthcare, and communication technologies.
• Improving Data Collection: Enhancing data collection methods to ensure accurate and comprehensive data on consumption expenditure, nutritional intake, and other relevant indicators.
• Developing Regional Poverty Lines: Considering regional variations in cost of living and consumption patterns to develop more accurate poverty lines for different regions.

Conclusion: A Legacy of Innovation and Debate

The Tendulkar Expert Group (2009) report marked a significant milestone in the history of poverty measurement in India. The report’s multi-dimensional approach, updated methodology, and comprehensive analysis provided valuable insights into the nature and extent of poverty in the country. While the report sparked debates and criticisms, it undeniably contributed to a more nuanced understanding of poverty and informed policy decisions aimed at reducing poverty and improving the lives of millions of Indians.

The TEG report serves as a reminder that poverty measurement is an ongoing process, requiring continuous research, refinement, and adaptation to the changing realities of society. As India continues its journey towards inclusive growth and development, the legacy of the TEG report will continue to guide future efforts to eradicate poverty and ensure a better future for all its citizens.

Table 1: Poverty Rates in India (Based on TEG 2009 Methodology)

Note: The poverty rates are based on the Tendulkar Expert Group’s (2009) poverty line and methodology.

Table 2: Regional Poverty Rates in India (Based on TEG 2009 Methodology)

Note: The poverty rates are based on the Tendulkar Expert Group’s (2009) poverty line and methodology.

Table 3: Rural-Urban Poverty Rates in India (Based on TEG 2009 Methodology)

Note: The poverty rates are based on the Tendulkar Expert Group’s (2009) poverty line and methodology.

Here are some frequently asked questions about the Tendulkar Expert Group (2009) report:

1. What was the main purpose of the Tendulkar Expert Group?

The Tendulkar Expert Group (TEG) was formed by the Planning Commission of India in 2009 to develop a new poverty line and methodology for measuring poverty in India. The existing poverty line, established by the Lakdawala Committee in 1979, was considered outdated and inadequate to reflect the changing realities of Indian society.

2. What were the key changes introduced by the TEG report in the way poverty was measured in India?

The TEG report introduced several key changes:

• Multi-dimensional approach: The TEG adopted a multi-dimensional approach, considering both consumption expenditure and nutritional intake, unlike the previous single-dimensional approach focused solely on consumption expenditure.
• Updated calorie requirement: The TEG defined the poverty line based on a revised calorie requirement for different age groups and genders, taking into account the nutritional needs of the Indian population.
• Weighting of indicators: The TEG assigned weights to both consumption expenditure and nutritional intake, reflecting their relative importance in determining poverty.

3. What were the main findings of the TEG report?

The TEG report found that:

• Poverty rates in India had declined significantly between 2004-05 and 2009-10.
• There were significant regional disparities in poverty levels, with some states having much higher poverty rates than others.
• There was a persistent rural-urban divide in poverty, with rural areas experiencing higher poverty rates than urban areas.
• Nutritional deprivation was prevalent, even among households above the poverty line, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to address malnutrition.

4. What were some of the criticisms of the TEG report?

The TEG report faced criticism for:

• Calorie requirement: Some critics argued that the TEG’s calorie requirement was too low and did not adequately reflect the nutritional needs of the Indian population.
• Weighting of indicators: The weighting assigned to consumption expenditure and nutritional intake was also subject to debate, with some arguing that the weight given to consumption expenditure was too high.
• Data limitations: The TEG report relied heavily on data from the NSSO, which was criticized for its limitations in capturing the true extent of poverty, particularly in remote and marginalized areas.

5. What was the impact of the TEG report on poverty measurement and policy in India?

The TEG report had a significant impact:

• Policy formulation: The report provided a strong foundation for policy formulation, informing the design and implementation of various poverty alleviation programs.
• Targeting of interventions: The TEG’s multi-dimensional approach helped to identify specific groups and regions facing higher poverty levels, enabling targeted interventions to address their unique needs.
• Monitoring and evaluation: The new poverty line and methodology provided a framework for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of poverty reduction programs, allowing for adjustments and improvements based on real-time data.

6. What are some of the key challenges in measuring poverty in India?

Measuring poverty in India is a complex task due to:

• Data limitations: Data collection methods may not capture the true extent of poverty, particularly in remote and marginalized areas.
• Regional variations: Poverty levels and consumption patterns vary significantly across different regions, requiring region-specific poverty lines.
• Evolving consumption patterns: The changing nature of the Indian economy and society necessitates regular updates to the poverty line and methodology to ensure accurate and relevant poverty measurement.

7. What are the future directions for poverty measurement in India?

Future research should focus on:

• Updating the calorie requirement: Revisiting the calorie requirement based on current scientific evidence and dietary patterns of the Indian population.
• Expanding the basket of goods and services: Incorporating new consumption patterns and essential goods and services, including access to education, healthcare, and communication technologies.
• Improving data collection: Enhancing data collection methods to ensure accurate and comprehensive data on consumption expenditure, nutritional intake, and other relevant indicators.
• Developing regional poverty lines: Considering regional variations in cost of living and consumption patterns to develop more accurate poverty lines for different regions.

The TEG report, while a landmark achievement, highlighted the need for continuous research and refinement of poverty indicators to ensure accurate and relevant poverty measurement in India.

Here are some multiple-choice questions (MCQs) about the Tendulkar Expert Group (2009) report:

1. What was the primary objective of the Tendulkar Expert Group (TEG)?

a) To study the impact of globalization on poverty in India.
b) To develop a new poverty line and methodology for measuring poverty in India.
c) To analyze the effectiveness of existing poverty alleviation programs.
d) To assess the role of education in reducing poverty.

Answer: b) To develop a new poverty line and methodology for measuring poverty in India.

2. Which of the following was NOT a key change introduced by the TEG report in the way poverty was measured in India?

a) Adoption of a multi-dimensional approach.
b) Inclusion of nutritional intake as a key indicator.
c) Use of a single-dimensional approach based solely on consumption expenditure.
d) Updated calorie requirement based on nutritional needs.

Answer: c) Use of a single-dimensional approach based solely on consumption expenditure.

3. According to the TEG report, what was the estimated poverty rate in India in 2009-10?

a) 37.2%
b) 21.9%
c) 10.9%
d) 5.8%

Answer: b) 21.9%

4. Which of the following statements about the TEG report’s findings is TRUE?

a) Poverty rates were highest in states like Kerala and Punjab.
b) The rural-urban divide in poverty had completely disappeared.
c) Nutritional deprivation was a significant concern, even among households above the poverty line.
d) The report found no evidence of regional disparities in poverty levels.

Answer: c) Nutritional deprivation was a significant concern, even among households above the poverty line.

5. Which of the following was NOT a criticism leveled against the TEG report?

a) The calorie requirement used was too low.
b) The weighting assigned to consumption expenditure was too high.
c) The report’s methodology was too complex and difficult to understand.
d) The data used by the TEG was unreliable and incomplete.

Answer: c) The report’s methodology was too complex and difficult to understand.

6. What was the primary impact of the TEG report on poverty measurement and policy in India?

a) It led to the complete eradication of poverty in India.
b) It provided a new framework for monitoring and evaluating poverty reduction programs.
c) It resulted in the immediate implementation of a universal basic income scheme.
d) It discouraged further research and development in the field of poverty measurement.

Answer: b) It provided a new framework for monitoring and evaluating poverty reduction programs.

7. Which of the following is a key challenge in measuring poverty in India?

a) The lack of reliable data on consumption expenditure and nutritional intake.
b) The absence of a clear definition of poverty.
c) The unwillingness of the government to address poverty.
d) The lack of interest in poverty measurement among researchers.

Answer: a) The lack of reliable data on consumption expenditure and nutritional intake.

8. What is a key area of focus for future research in poverty measurement in India?

a) Developing a single, universal poverty line for all regions.
b) Eliminating the use of nutritional intake as a poverty indicator.
c) Updating the calorie requirement based on current scientific evidence.
d) Abandoning the multi-dimensional approach to poverty measurement.

Answer: c) Updating the calorie requirement based on current scientific evidence.