POVERTY AND INEQUALITY

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the award of the degree of

Bachelor of Commerce (BCOM)

To

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi

Guide: Ms Anjum Tanwar Submitted by: Yashsvee Sharma

Roll No.: 35624488818

Institute of Innovation in Technology & Management,

New Delhi – 110058
Batch (2018-2021)

1
 Certificate

I, Ms. YASHSVEE SHARMA, Roll No. 35624488818, certify that the Minor

Project Dissertation (BCOM-112) entitled “Poverty And Inequality” is done by me

and it is an authentic work carried out by me. The matter embodied in this project

work has not been submitted earlier for the award of any degree or diploma to the best

of my knowledge and belief.

Signature of the Student

Date:

Certified that the Minor Project Report/Dissertation (BCOM-112) entitled “Poverty

And Inequality” done by Ms. YASHSVEE SHARMA, Roll No. 35624488818, is

completed under my guidance.

Signature of the Guide

Date:
Name of the Guide:
Designation:

Countersigned
Director / Project Coordinator

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible without

the kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. I would like to

extend my sincere thanks to all of them. I am highly indebted to Ms. ANJUM

TANWAR for her guidance and constant supervision as well as for providing

necessary information regarding the project & also for their support in completing the

project. I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents for their kind co-

operation and encouragement which help me in the completion of this project. My

thanks and appreciations also go to my colleague in developing the project and people

who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

YASHSVEE SHARMA
B.com Honours
2nd Semester

3
 CONTENTS

S No Topic Page No
1 Certificate (s) 2
2 Acknowledgments 3
3 List of Figures 4
4 List of Tables 5
5 List of Abbreviations 5
6 Chapter-1: Introduction 6
7 Chapter-2: Research Methodology 11
8 Chapter-3: Data presentation and analysis 12
9 Chapter-4: summary and conclusion 27
10 Reference and bibliography 31

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title Page No

No
1 Graph of BPL and APL 10
2 Poverty in world 16
3 Percentage of population suffering from hunger 16
4 Scenario of absolute poverty 18
5 Evolution of poverty 19
6 Worst ten states 20
7 Best ten states 21

4
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page No

No
1 National poverty line comparisation 22
2 No. Of rural and urban poor 22

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

S No Abbreviated Name Full Name

1 BPL Below poverty line
2 APL Above poverty line
3 CMIE Central for monitoring Indian economy
4 PPP Purchasing power parity
5 IRDP Integrated rural development programme
6 SGRY Sampoorna garmin rozgar yojana
7 MGNREGA Mahatma Gandhi national rural
employment guarantee act
8 PMKVY Pradhan mantra kaushal vikas yojana
9 PDS Public distribution system

5
 CHAPTER 1

INRODUCTION
The relationship between poverty and inequality is neither clear nor direct. Poverty
and inequality are analytically distinct concepts. They vary independently of each
other, and it is misleading beyond a point to treat the one as a marker of the other. The
study of both poverty and inequality has been closely associated with an interest in
economic and social change. But poverty and inequality do not change at the same
pace, and they may even change in opposite directions. It is difficult to make any
meaningful statement about the relationship between the two without specifying
which conception of poverty and which aspect of inequality one has in mind.

Meaning of Poverty
Poverty is a state or condition in which a person or community lacks the financial
resources and essentials for a minimum standard of living.

“Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able
to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read.
Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time. Poverty is
losing a child to illness brought about by unclean water. Poverty is powerlessness,
lack of representation and freedom."

This poverty definition encompasses living conditions, an inability to meet basic

needs because food, clean drinking water, proper sanitation, education, health care
and other social services are inaccessible

This poverty threshold starts with fear for the future and broadens to include
dependence, oppression and even exploitation

Because this larger measure of poverty expands the contributors and causes of
poverty, the World Bank developed indicators to assess the non-income dimensions of
poverty as well. The indicators include education, health, access to social services,
vulnerability, social exclusion, and access to social capital

Meaning of Inequality
Inequality is concerned with disparities in the distribution of a certain metric, which can be
income, health or any other material or non-material asset. Inequality typically refers
to within country inequality on individual or group level, such as between gender,
urban and rural population, race etc. Inequality among countries is referred to as
international inequality.

Inequality is closed linked to the ideas of equity, which has two contrasting concepts:
equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

6
The first one, equality of opportunity, is concerned with the equal potential of every
individual access public services and rights. Liberal thinking considers equality of
opportunity, in particular in education, as fundamental precondition for a truly meritocratic
system. Equality of opportunity to access health care, education or job openings are
today considered fundamental in the European welfare systems.

The second aspect of equity, equality of outcome, is concerned with the actual outcome
of asset distribution within or among countries. Policies to reach equality of outcome
often include direct and indirect redistribution.

The concepts can however not always been seen in contrast. For example, the equality
of outcome, i.e. the effective assets of a family, affect the equality opportunity of their
children in many aspects as many studies have shown. Low household income has been
shown to correlate across cultures to many indicators of child well-being.

Income inequality between the world’s richest and poorest is higher than ever before,
with the richest 5 percent of people receiving one-third of total global income, as much as
the poorest 80 percent.

7
 What is Relative Vs. Absolute Poverty

Absolute Poverty is when household income is below a certain level, which

makes it impossible for the person or family to meet basic needs of life including
food, shelter, safe drinking water, education, healthcare, etc.
In this state of poverty, even if the country is growing economically it has no
effect on people living below the poverty line. Absolute poverty compares
households based on a set income level and this level varies from country to
country depending on its overall economic conditions
.

Relative Poverty is when households receive 50% less than average household
incomes, so they do have some money but still not enough money to afford anything
above the basics. This type of poverty is, on the other hand, changeable depending on
the economic growth of the country.
Relative poverty is sometimes described as “relative deprivation” because the people
falling under this category are not living in total poverty, but they are not enjoying the
same standard of life as everyone else in the country. It can be TV, internet, clean
clothes, a safe home (a healthy environment, free from abuse or neglect), or even
education.
Difference between Relative and Absolute Poverty

1. Biological Needs in Relative and Absolute Poverty

The primary differences between absolute and relative poverty are that absolute
poverty focuses more on the biological needs while relative poverty has nothing to do
with biological needs.

According to the definition of more Absolute poverty, any person who is not in a
position to meet the most basic commodities to sustain life like food, shelter, and
clothing is considered to experiencing extreme poverty.

On the other hand, relative poverty does not classify biological needs in its definition
but focuses on the comparison between other people within the environment.

It is important to highlight that one can be meeting his or her biological needs but still
be considered as poor under relative poverty measurement.

2. Income Levels in Relative and Absolute Poverty

The second difference is that the income level is highly considered in absolute

poverty, but it is not considered under the relative poverty measurement.

8
People who have a considerable amount of income can meet their basic commodities,

which include food, shelter, and clothing and can even go further to fund their

entertainment. However, one may be accomplishing these factors but still be

considered poor under the relative poverty model.

This is because other individuals within his or her settings are accomplishing greater

life achievements while at the same time getting large amounts of income as

compared to his or her outcome.

3. Country Dependency in Relative and Absolute Poverty

Relative poverty varies between developed and developing countries while absolute

poverty does not vary.

Some of the western and developed countries have a smaller number of people who

are under relative poverty while developing countries, especially those in the African

region has a significant number of people under the relative poverty measurement

model.

This is not the same for extreme poverty, which has been maintained at a constant by

the World Bank. Any individual who lives under $1.90 is considered to be

experiencing absolute poverty under the World Bank measurement paradigm.

It is important to highlight that a significant number of populations in Africa live

under the highlighted amount.

4. Changes in Relative and Absolute Poverty

The other difference is that absolute poverty can change while relative poverty cannot

change.

9
A government may put measures to ensure that all its population can earn more than

$1.90 per day, which will enable them to meet basic commodities like food, clothing,

and shelter However; it is very difficult for the government to alleviate all persons

above relative poverty.

According to economic experts, there will always exist people with factors of

production, which makes them be rich as compared to other population. This means

that some people will always be poor as compared to the rich people.

This is the case in the developed countries where some people are rich while others

can only meet their basic needs and afford to pay for leisure and entertainment

activities.

5. Poverty Alleviation Programs for Relative and Absolute Poverty

Different international bodies and government of various countries have developed

policies and measures to ensure that absolute poverty is eradicated around the world,

while there are no measures and policies implemented to alleviate relative poverty.

The United Nations has included poverty absolute poverty eradication as one of its

sustainable development goals while there is no body concerned with the eradication

of relative poverty in the world.

However, it is imperative to highlight that various governments have been developing

measures to ensure that at least all the populations in those countries can attain the

middle-income status.

6. Quality of Life in Relative and Absolute Poverty

People living in absolute poverty have poor quality lives while those living in relative

poverty have quality lives.

10
Besides, people living under extreme poverty levels cannot access basic commodities

in their lives like food and shelter, which makes them highly vulnerable to diseases.

Moreover, the conditions are likely to be dirty with a high level of crime and lacking

in medications. This is not the same for people living in relative poverty because they

can access various commodities and can meet medication costs.

CONCEPT OF BPL AND APL

 BPL
Below Poverty Line is an economic benchmark used by the government of India to
indicate economic disadvantage and to identify individuals and households in need of
government assistance and aid. It is determined using various parameters which vary
from state to state and within states. The present criteria are based on a survey
conducted in 2002. Going into a survey due for a decade, India's central government
is undecided on criteria to identify families below poverty line.[1]

 APL

Above poverty line In India, A measure of persons who live above its nationally
designated poverty threshold people in urban area must meet higher monthly income

Minimum to be considered above the poverty line. The world bank uses a more
stringent poverty threshold than the Indian government.

11
 FIGURE 1

CHAPTER 2

RESEARCH METHDOLOGY
The Rangarajan committee estimation is based on an independent large survey of

households by Center for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE). It has also used

different methodology wherein a household is considered poor if it is unable to save.

The methods also include on certain normative levels of adequate nourishment,

clothing, house rent, conveyance, education and also behavioral determination of non-

food expenses. It also considered average requirements of calories, protein and fats

based on ICMR norms differentiated by age and gender.

Based on this methodology, Rangarajan committee estimated the number of poor

were 19 per cent higher in rural areas and 41 per cent more in urban areas than what

was estimated using Tendulkar committee formula.

Tendulkar, an economist, had devised the formula to assess poverty line in 2005,

which the Planning Commission had used to estimate poverty in 2009-10 and 2011-

2012.

The methodology to measure poverty was first devised by expert group headed by Y

K Alagh in 1979, which was further improvised by the expert group headed by D T

Lakadwala in 1993.

C. Rangarajan Committee Report: Report of the expert group to review the

methodology for measurement of poverty

Press Note on Poverty Estimates, 2011-12

12
Tendulkar Committee Report: Report of the expert group to review the methodology
for estimation of poverty

CHAPTER 3

Data Presentation & Analysis

India has a significant problem of poverty, despite being one of the fastest-growing
economies in the world. It had a growth rate of 7.11% in 2015, and a
sizable consumer economy. The World Bank reviewed and proposed revisions on
May 2014 to its poverty calculation methodology and purchasing power parity basis
for measuring poverty worldwide. According to this revised methodology, the world
had 872.3 million people below the new poverty line, India had third highest number
of people living in extreme poverty in after Nigeria and Congo in January
2019.] Although, it was a minimal 3.6% in terms of percentage. As of 2014, 58% of
the total population were living on less than $3.10 per day. According to the Modified
Mixed Reference Period (MMRP) concept proposed by World Bank in 2015, India's
poverty rate for period 2011-12 stood at 12.4% of the total population, or about 172
million people; taking the revised poverty line as $1.90.

Economic Measures
There are several definitions of poverty, and scholars disagree as to which definition
is appropriate for India. Inside India, both income-based poverty definition and
consumption-based poverty statistics are in use. Outside India, the World Bank and
institutions of the United Nations use a broader definition to compare poverty among
nations, including India, based on purchasing power parity (PPP), as well as nominal
relative basis. Each state in India has its own poverty threshold to determine how
many people are below its poverty line and to reflect regional economic conditions.
These differences in definition yield a complex and conflicting picture about poverty
in India, both internally and when compared to other developing countries of the
world
Measuring Inequality
The most common measure of income inequality is the Gini coefficient. The
coefficient varies between 0, which reflects complete equality and 1, which indicates
complete inequality. So, a country with a low Gini co-efficient like Denmark (.24) is
said to be more equal than a country with a high co-efficient such as Namibia (.74).
Another measure of inequality is Deciles. This indicator is fairly simple to
understand[3] and is one of the many inequality indicators used by several
organizations such as OECD[4] and the US government.[5] Basically, the main idea is
that deciles show how income is distributed, how much of the total income in a

13
country is earned by lower wage earning groups and how much of the total income is
earned by higher wage earning income groups. If the people in the top and bottom
groups earn the same proportion of the income, then there is income equality. If the
top groups earns a much higher percent of the total income, while people in the
bottom groups earn much lower percent of the total income, then there is inequality.

Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index

(IHDI)

This index adjusts the HDI to reflect inequalities in income, health and education.

Comparable to the HDI indices which measures health, education and income indicators,

the IHDI measures the inequality in the distribution of these indicators across the

society. When the IHDI is the same as the HDI then total equality of human

development is achieved. The IHDI discounts the overall HDI figure to show inequality

across all the indicators, therefore indicating the 'loss' in potential human development

as a result of inequality (UNDP 2010 p. 87).

The IHDI attempts to capture the range of inequalities and illustrates that high HDI

ranking does not indicate high equality, for example, Mozambique (ranked 165) loses

over 45% of its HDI value and the much higher ranked Peru (ranked 63) loses 31% of

its HDI value in the IHDI index, whilst the Ukraine (ranked lower than Peru at 69) only

loses 8% in their IHDI value. A major limitation of the IHDI is its inability to capture

overlapping inequalities; it is therefore not known how the different inequalities are

dispersed throughout society (see 1.1.2).

The Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)

This index considers multiple dimensions of poverty at the household level such as basic

living standards, access to schooling, clean water and health care. The Multidimensional

Poverty Index has been introduced to replace the Human Poverty Index which has been

in use since 1997. The HPI measured deprivations in health, education and the standard

of living. The measure worked on country averages and therefore only illustrated

aggregate deprivations rather than deprivation attributed to specific groups. The MPI

seeks to overcome this limitation by capturing the number of people experiencing

deprivations (including multiple deprivations) and the average number of deprivations

experienced. Thus the MPI represents the incidence and intensity of poverty and it can

be located to a particular region, locality, ethnic group.

14
1.3.2 illustrates the IHDI in comparison to the HDI value. It is clear that some countries

are more unequal that others. The IHDI takes into account not only the country's

average human development but also how it is distributed across the dimensions of life

expectancy, education, and standard of living. By estimating the IHDI it is possible to

see the effects of inequality in each country. The Human Development Report 2010

estimates that most countries lose on average 22% of their HDI due to inequality. Most

inequalities occur in education and health rather than income although in sub-Saharan

Africa inequality occurs across all dimensions.

Figure-2 International Human Development Indicators 2010

Inequality-
GDP per adjusted
HDI Rank HDI value % loss of HDI
capita* HDI value
(IHDI)

Brazil 14 192 73 0.699 0.593 27.2

Ethiopia 991 157 0.328 0.216 34.3

Egypt 5840 101 0.62 0.449 27.5

Ghana 1533 130 0.467 0.349 25

Mexico 14 192 56 0.75 0.593 21

Mozambique 929 165 0.284 0.155 45.3

Peru 9016 63 0.723 0.501 31

Rwanda 1102 152 0.385 0.243 37

Ukraine 6591 69 0.71 0.652 8.1

* Based on the growth rate of GDP per capita (in PPP US$) from IMF (2010).
Source: summarised data from Economic Outlook - statistical tables UNDP (2010)

Analysing who is poor and why sheds light on causes of poverty. Differences between

the poor include the depth of poverty which has led to distinctions made by the Chronic

Poverty Research Centre between those who are trapped in chronic poverty and those

who move in and out of poverty over time. Commonly, women, children, the disabled,

15
and the elderly are disproportionately represented amongst the poor. This reflects their

greater vulnerability or risk of becoming poor.

Social analysis has called attention to the way that different views of poverty

conceptualise the problem that development needs to address. Characterising the poor

is important but without a proper analysis of the factors creating poverty this focus can

lead to a view that the poor themselves are the problem that needs to be remedied.

However, as multi-dimensional approaches to poverty have recognised, the poor are

disadvantaged in terms of access to opportunities, skills, political power and social

networks and these factors both create and reinforce their material poverty.

The way that the different dimensions of disadvantage experienced by the poor 'lock'

them into poverty have been conceptualised in terms of social exclusion. Social research

has explored the processes that create and reinforce poverty and see these at root as

arising from unequal power relations. From this perspective, poverty is produced by

society and can only be meaningfully addressed by tackling these inequalities and

creating a society that is fairer. Analysis of the processes that create poverty involves

describing the nature of inequality in a particular society and how it operates through

various formal and informal mechanisms. These processes can only be reflected to a

limited extent by quantitative data and also require qualitative analysis and

interpretation. The value of qualitative understandings of poverty is well demonstrated

by the following case study of female youth in urban Zimbabwe.

The Gender Inequality Index (GII)

This index includes maternal mortality rates (from UNESCO) and women's parliamentary

representation. The Gender Inequality Index (GII) attempts to deal with some of these

limitations by adding three new dimensions which reflect women's reproductive health

status, empowerment and labour market participation in comparison to men's. It also

excludes income which is seen to be less relevant in developing countries. The

desegregation of data ensures that high achievement in one dimension does not

compensate for low achievement in another dimension. The GII value increases as

gender inequalities increase. One of the major advantages of the index is seen to be the

ability for it to capture the linkages across different dimensions for example schooling

16
and access to work. The GII does not however capture other relevant dimensions such

as time-use, access to assets, domestic violence, and local-level empowerment

Causes of Poverty in India

(i) Heavy Pressure of Population:

Population has been rising in India at a rapid speed. This rise is mainly due to fall in
death rate and more birth rate.

India’s population was 84.63 crores in 1991 and became 102.87 crores in 2001. This
pressure of population proves hindrance in the way of economic development.

(ii) Unemployment and under employment:

Due to continuous rise in population, there is chronic unemployment and under
employment in India. There is educated unemployment and disguised unemployment.
Poverty is just the reflection of unemployment.

(iii) Capital Deficiency:

Capital is needed for setting up industry, transport and other projects. Shortage of
capital creates hurdles in development.

17
iv) Under-Developed Economy:
The Indian economy is under developed due to low rate of growth. It is the main
cause of poverty.

(v) Increase in Price:

The steep rise in prices has affected the poor badly. They have become more poor.

(vi) Net National Income:

The net national income is quite low as compared to size of population. Low per
capita income proves its poverty. The per capita income in 2003-04 was Rs. 20989
which proves India is one of the poorest nations.

(vii) Rural Economy:

Indian economy is rural economy. Indian agriculture is backward. It has great
pressure of population. Income in agriculture is low and disguised unemployment is
more in agriculture.

(viii) Lack of Skilled Labour

In India, unskilled labour is in abundant supply but skilled labour is less due to
insufficient industrial education and training.

(ix) Deficiency of efficient Entrepreneurs:

For industrial development, able and efficient entrepreneurs are needed. In India,
there is shortage of efficient entrepreneurs. Less industrial development is a major
cause of poverty.

x) Lack of proper Industrialisation:

Industrially, India is a backward state. 3% of total working population is engaged in
industry. So industrial backwardness is major cause of poverty.

(xi) Low rate of Growth:

The growth rate of the economy has been 3.7% and growth rate of population has
been 1.8%. So compared to population, per capita growth rate of economy has been
very low. It is the main cause of poverty.

(xii) Outdated Social institutions:

The social structure of our country is full of outdated traditions and customs like caste
system, laws of inheritance and succession. These hamper the growth of economy.

18
(xiii) Improper use of Natural Resources:
India has large natural resources like iron, coal, manganese, mica etc. It has perennial
flowing rivers that can generate hydro electricity. Man power is abundant. But these
sources are not put in proper use.

(xiv) Lack of Infrastructure:

The means of transport and communication have not been properly developed. The
road transport is inadequate and railway is quite less. Due to lack of proper
development of road and rail transport, agricultural marketing is defective. Industries
do not get power supply and raw materials in time and finished goods are not properly
marketed.

FACT ABOUT POVERTY IN INDIA

 to a survey done by CNN, only five percent of India’s surveyed population made enough to
pay taxes, 2.5 percent owned a vehicle and less than 10 percent had a salaried job.

 With such economic struggles, literacy is extremely uncommon in rural areas. Only 3.5
percent of students in India graduate and about 35.7 percent of the population doesn’t
know how to write or
 read.

19
 In 2012, there were 270,000,000 — or one in every five — impoverished Indians; 80 percent
of these poor Indians lived in rural areas.
 Twenty-one percent of poor Indians have restrooms, 61 percent have electricity and only 6
percent have tap water.

 With poverty affecting Indian lives so much, 38 of every 1,000 babies born in India die before
making it to their one-year mark.

 The rapid population growth in India is one of the major reasons for poverty within the
country. The growth of the population exceeds the rate of growth in the country’s overall
income. This heavily affects the poor because population growth creates a need for an
increased labor supply, which is a profession with low wage rates.

 One of the top 10 facts about poverty in India includes climatic conditions and the effect such
impacts have on poverty within the country as a whole. India’s climate is extremely hot,
which makes it difficult for Indians to work. This inability, in turn, causes production to suffer
and therefore, the income of Indians to suffer as well. Also, there are numerous amounts of
floods, earthquakes and cyclones that cause extreme damage to agriculture and infrastructure;
all of these conditions make it difficult for people living in poverty.

 Your Article Library” explains that low levels of investment create low income and that the
circle poverty is seemingly never-ending within India.

 Business Today explains that India recently accounted for the largest amount of people living
below the poverty line; 30 percent of India’s population lives on less than $1.90 a day.

 The Huffington Post reveals that 56 percent of Indians (around 680 million people) lack the
ability to meet their basic needs. Even the people who are officially above the poverty line
(around 413 million people) are still vulnerable to such harsh conditions.

20
Figure 2

FIGURE 3 Percentage of population suffering from hunger

Impact of Poverty

21
 Poverty brings about a myriad of complications. The effects usually depend
on the kind of poverty in question. Let us see more below:

Hunger, Health and Deaths.

Absolute poverty results in extreme hunger, starvation and malnutrition.
People (and children) become vulnerable to preventable diseases such as
cholera, dysentery and tuberculosis, with no access to health services and
medications. Death rates rise. Relative poverty on the other hand, forces
people to engage in behaviors that expose them to diseases such as HIV
Aids. Whiles they may not starve to death, they may be living on unhealthy
foods, which ultimately weaken their immunity and expose them to diseases.

Infectious diseases continue to blight the lives of the poor across the world. An
estimated 40 million people are living with HIV/AIDS, with 3 million deaths in
2004. Every year there are 350–500 million cases of malaria, with 1 million
fatalities: Africa accounts for 90 percent of malarial deaths and African children
account for over 80 percent of malaria victims worldwide.

 Social and Political

Relative poverty may cause people to indulge in social vices such as drugs,
prostitution and petty crimes as a means to meet their immediate needs. In
many developing countries, political leaders and rebel leaders take
advantage and recruit young people, (especially those in relative poverty) to
fight for their interests, in return for food and basic needs. These young folks
feel vulnerable if they do not comply, as they have no other way out of their
situation.

 Economic
People in absolute poverty simply cannot afford food, water and shelter.
They are not healthy enough to undertake any economic activity. They
cannot send their young to school and the youth cannot get any skills. This
results in economic breakdown of the community, which directly affects the
larger region where they are. Further to that, those in relative poverty, who
have a bit of training or education, are forced to move out (migrate) in
search of better lives in the cities. This deprives the rural areas of the man-
power and makes their situation worse. As they migrate into the cities, the
end up in slums, increase populations and put pressure on amenities in the
cities.

22
The Vicious Cycle of Poverty
This is a phenomenon used often by economic scientists. It simply means poverty
begets poverty. It is a concept that illustrates how poverty causes poverty and traps
people in poverty unless an external intervention is applied to break the cycle.

Let's look at this scenario with a family in absolute poverty.

Figure 4

A very poor family with children have very little to eat, and have no access to health
facilities. As a result, the children are malnourished and unhealthy and have many
health complications. They are therefore unable to go to school (even if there is a
school in the next village). They grow up with no education or skill and cannot do any
economic activity. Their parent die from preventable diseases as a result of the lack of
health facilities, and their fate is in their hands. As the children turn adults, they find
wives who are just on the same level of poverty as them, and they have their own
children. They hand over this condition to their children, who will also grow up in
similar Conditions.

It takes an intervention from governments, charity organizations or family members

who are better off to step in and provide some kind of assistance (health, feeding,
shelter and basic education) to get the youth to do some kind of economic activity to
bring in some income. Without that, this cycle will continue for generations and it’s a
trap that is extremely difficult to get out of.

This concept can also be applied to countries and larger economies, although the
dynamics may be slightly different.

23
 Figure 5

POVERTY ESTIMATION IN INDIA

24
There are two ways to measure poverty--relative and absolute. Poverty estimates in
advanced economies are based on the calculation of relative poverty, with the average
standard of living used as the reference point. People are counted as poor if they
cannot maintain this level. In India, poverty is estimated at absolute level or the
minimum money required for subsistence. The poverty line is defined as the
minimum money required for maintaining a per capita caloric intake of 2,100 calories
in an urban area and 2,400 calories in a rural area. These estimates are done by
analysing monthly per capita expenditure baskets of NSSO surveys. By this
methodology, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Bihar have
the highest proportion of BPL persons in the latest estimates

Figure 6

25
 Figure 7

Comparison with alternate international definitions

For its current poverty rate measurements, India calculates two benchmarks. The first
includes a basket of goods including food items but does not include the implied value
of home, value of any means of conveyance or the economic value of other essentials
created, grown or used without a financial transaction, by the members of a
household. The second poverty line benchmark adds rent value of residence as well as
the cost of conveyance, but nothing else, to the first benchmark. This practice is
similar to those used in developed countries for non-cash income equivalents and
poverty line basis.
India's proposed but not yet adopted official poverty line, in 2014, was ₹972 (US$14)
a month in rural areas or ₹1,407 (US$20) a month in cities. The current poverty line is
$14 per month ($0.46 per day) in rural areas and $17 per month ($0.56 per day) in
urban areas.[] India's nationwide average poverty line differs from each state's poverty
line. For example, in 2011-2012, Puducherry had its highest poverty line
of ₹1,301 (US$18) a month in rural and ₹1,309 (US$18) a month in urban areas,
while Odisha had the lowest poverty thresholds of ₹695 (US$9.70) a month for rural
and ₹861 (US$12) a month for its urban areas

26
 National poverty lines comparison
(Note: this is historical data, not current)

Poverty line
Country Year Reference
(per day)

[38]
India 32 rupees ($0.5) 2017

[45]
Argentina 481 pesos ($11.81) 2017

[46]
China 6.3 yuan ($1) 2011

[47]
Nigeria 65 naira ($0.4) 2011

United States $14[48] 2005 [49][5

Table 1

New poverty line: Rs 32 for rural India, Rs 47 for urban India

The expert committee set up by the Planning Commission last year under C

Rangarajan, former chairperson of Prime Minister's Economic Advisory Council, has

redefined the poverty line. According to the report of the committee, the new poverty

line should be Rs 32 in rural areas and Rs 47 in urban areas. The earlier poverty line

figure was Rs 27 for rural India and Rs 33 for Urban India (see table).

No. of No. of
Percent
Rural urban Total
of poor
poor poor

Rangarajan 260.5 102.5 363

29.5
Committee million million million

Tendulkar 216.5 52.8 269

21.9%
committee million million million

44 49.7 93.7
Difference
million million million
TABLE2

27
The Rangarajan report has added 93.7 million more to the list of the poor assessed last
year as per the Suresh Tendulkar committee formula. Now the total number of poor
has reached 363 million from 269 million in 2011-12.

This raise in the poverty line income bar means 93.7 million more people are now

below poverty line (BPL).

The Planning commission had set up the five-member expert group under Rangarajan

to review the methodology for measurement of poverty. The committee was set up in

the backdrop of national outrage over the Planning Commission’s suggested poverty

line of Rs 22 a day for rural areas.

In January 2018, at the World Economic Forum at Davos, an Oxfam

report on global inequality reiterated, once again, that the rich are
getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. According to the
report, India’s wealthiest 10% now hold 77.4% of the total national
wealth and the top 1% hold 51.53% of it. With the wealth of the top
1% increasing at an estimated rate of ₹ 2,200 crores per day in
2018, it is no wonder that income inequality in India was called
“morally outrageous.”
The obverse of this is evident: the poor get poorer because their
share of the national wealth is getting smaller and smaller. Despite
this, the central government continues to hold the view that a higher
rate of economic growth will alleviate poverty. However,
macroeconomic indicators like gross domestic product (GDP), or per
capita income are insufficient to measure growth because they
assume that the total national wealth is percolating to the lowest
levels. This framework of growth also conceptualises poverty in
objective terms, that is, it defines a certain level of income as the
poverty line and aims to rectify that.
However, at the policy level, poverty needs to be conceptualised in
relative terms. It needs to be seen as inextricably linked to
inequality.

28
In this reading list, we look at six articles that help us understand
why we need to account for inequality to effectively deal with
poverty.
1) Inequality Determines the Level of Poverty
Radhicka Kapoor argued that if economic growth automatically meant a reduction
in poverty, India should have witnessed a steeper decline in poverty. In her article,
she finds that states like Bihar and Chhattisgarh, which witnessed the highest
growth rates between 2004–05 and 2009–10, did not record the steepest decline in
poverty. But Tripura, that had a below-average growth rate, performed the best in
terms of poverty reduction.
Poverty is a function not just of mean incomes but also of income distribution.
Importantly, the relationship between growth and poverty is mediated by
inequality … the level of inequality determines what the share of the poor in the
growth process will be. In countries with high initial inequality, the poor tend to
have a lower share of the gains from growth. This can be explained as follows: if
we assume a growth process in which all levels of income grow roughly at the
same rate, high levels of inequality will entail that the poor gain less in absolute
terms from growth and that they will have a smaller share of both total income and
its increment through growth. Consequently, the rate of poverty reduction will be
lower.
2) Inequality is Not Measured Accurately in India
Thomas E Weisskopf wrote that in a country like India, where poverty is still an
extensive problem, policy measures need to focus on the distribution of income.
However, data on inequality does not adequately represent the real picture. In the
absence of reliable data, how can effective policy be formulated?

In India ... the inequality data collected most frequently and most systematically—
by the National Sample Survey (NSS)—involve the distribution of expenditure on
consumption rather than income. Because the rich tend to save a significant
fraction of their income, while the poor tend to use all of their income—and often
some borrowed money as well—for consumption, the distribution of consumption
is considerably less unequal than that of income. Furthermore, the NSS has a
practice of oversampling the poor and undersampling the rich (often missing the
super-rich altogether), so its survey results tend to understate the degree of
inequality even of consumption. Thus measures of inequality calculated for
consumption in India significantly understate the actual degree of inequality in
income.

3) Inequality is Rising at an Alarming Rate

Ishan Anand and Anjana Thampi analysed the trends in wealth ownership in India
between 1991 and 2012. They used three rounds of the All-India Debt and
Investment Survey and found a greater concentration of wealth with the top 10%
of the population, particularly after 2002. From their study, they hypothesised that

29
the rising levels of wealth inequality were deeply linked to the neo-liberal growth
process in India that resulted in a concentration of wealth in the urban areas.
The massive rise in wealth inequality was witnessed mainly between 2002 and
2012; this decade includes the high growth period between 2003 and 2008. The
consumption and wealth data independently show that the gains from this growth
have not been distributed equally. The latest round of AIDIS does not provide
information regarding the National Classification of Occupations (NCO). This
hampers a deeper understanding of the occupational and class categories that
have gained the most in terms of wealth.
4) Inequality Worsened in the Post-reform Period
The discourse tying poverty to economic growth rate developed in the post-
independence period. For the first three decades after independence, the Indian
economy grew at a sluggish pace of 3.5%, while a large part of the population
remained below the poverty line. An accelerated rate of growth per annum, it was
thought, was the way to eliminate poverty. But this could only work while India
was still following protectionist policies. In their article studying regional
inequality in India during the 1980s and the 1990s, S Sakthivel and Sabyasachi
Kar found that inequality rose along with the growth rate in the post-reform
period. Through an analysis of the various sectors of the economy in the two
decades, they found that regional inequality in India remained unchanged during
the 1980s mainly due to a fall in inequality within the industrial and the service
sectors.
In the pre-reform period, the public sector had played a crucial role in maintaining
regional equality in the Indian economy by directing resources to backward areas.
With a change in the focus of the public sector following the reforms, this process
has become weaker. Secondly, the reforms gave greater freedom and impetus to
the private sector and export-oriented production. These sectors, which were
attempting to reduce costs and become competitive, were attracted to the areas that
were relatively more developed. As a result, investment and activity shifted to
these areas, strengthening the forces of divergence.
Another article by Angus Deaton and Jean Dréze, re-evaluating the decline of
poverty, found that the post-reform period also aggravated rural–urban inequality.
The official figures reflected a decline in poverty from 36% to 26% between
1993–94 and 1999–2000. But Deaton and Dréze have argued that this sharp
decline is invalid, owing to methodological changes instituted by the National
Sample Survey to estimate the second figure. Comparing data from the 50th and
55th Rounds of the NSSO, they suggested that the decline in poverty was not as
drastic as was presented because in the same period after liberalisation, inequality,
and particularly rural and urban inequality, rose sharply.
Three aspects of rising economic inequality in the nineties have come up so far in
our story. First, we found strong evidence of ‘divergence’ in per capita growth rate
of real agricultural wage. Proportionate decline in rural consumption across states.
Second, our estimates of the growth rates of per capita expenditure between 1993-
94 and 1999- 2000 … point to a significant increase in rural-urban inequalities at
the all India level, and also in most individual states. Third, the decomposition
exercise in the preceding section shows that rising inequality within states,

30
particularly in the urban sector, has moderated the effects of growth on poverty
reduction.
5) Inequality Compounds Over Time
Panchanan Das studied wage inequality using the 61st round of the NSS which
corresponded to 2004–05. His study establishes a direct relationship between the
availability of social goods and the wages that a worker can expect, thus making it
apparent that privilege plays an important role in perpetuating inequality. He drew
on the human capital theory and included variables like education, training and
experience to estimate inequality, and found that these factors do affect wage
inequality. He also studied how the wage gap is gendered.
A substantial wage gap exists between workers engaged in different sectors.
Workers in the informal sector are paid even less than one-third of the formal
sector wage. In India, the average wage in the formal private sector job is higher
than that in the public sector. The wage differential is higher in rural as compared
to urban areas, and is also higher among women than among men workers. By
examining wages in public, private-formal and informal sectors, it is observed that
the differences in wages among workers are the highest in the private-formal
sector. Wage inequality among regular workers is considerably higher than that
among casual workers. Women workers earn much lower wages than their men
counterparts and inequality among the former is much higher than among the
latter. Surprisingly enough, wage inequality among women is the highest in public
sector jobs in the country.
Vamsi Vakulabharanam analysed India’s macroeconomic growth statistics for the
period 1994–2005 and found that over that period, the class structure was
witnessing a shift owing to rising inequality. From a loose coalition of dominant
classes in the 1980s, India witnessed the emergence of the urban elite as the
singular dominant class after liberalisation. Vakulabharanam found that luxury
consumption, investment and exports had driven the growth observed in the post-
reform period, while the rest of the economy did not really benefit. Particularly,
investment in agriculture saw a stiff decline, and this led him to conclude that “the
predominant majority in India has not significantly benefited from the growth
process.”
This consolidation of a new class structure comes through largely in the analysis
of the levels and changes in the consumption patterns as revealed by the NSS
consumption surveys. Several policy conclusions follow if this skewed pattern of
growth and rising inequality need to be counteracted. First, it is obvious that the
agricultural sector needs higher public investments and better support in terms of
promoting institutional lending and so forth. However, it is the poor peasants and
agricultural workers who really need to be supported … Second, the enclave
sectors in the urban areas need to be opened up in favour of labour-intensive
strategies of economic development. This will begin to generate more employment
in urban areas, which will once again improve consumption levels of the poorer
working groups. Third, the non-agricultural sector needs to be developed along
cooperative lines, perhaps taking a cue from the Chinese growth strategy,
especially in the 1980s and 1990s.

31
 Government Programme To Alleviate Poverty

1. Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP):

The Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), which was introduced in

1978-79 and universalized from 2nd October, 1980, aimed at providing assistance to
the rural poor in the form of subsidy and bank credit for productive employment
opportunities through successive plan periods. On 1st April, 1999, the IRDP and
allied programmes were merged into a single programme known as Swarnajayanti
Gram Swarozgar Yojana (SGSY). The SGSY emphasizes on organizing the rural poor
into self-help groups, capacity-building, planning of activity clusters, infrastructure
support, technology, credit and marketing linkages.

2. Jawahar Rozgar Yojana/Jawahar Gram Samriddhi Yojana:

Under the Wage Employment Programmes, the National Rural Employment

Programme (NREP) and Rural Landless Employment Guarantee Programme
(RLEGP) were started in Sixth and Seventh Plans. The NREP and RLEGP were
merged in April 1989 under Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY). The JRY was meant to
generate meaningful employment opportunities for the unemployed and
underemployed in rural areas through the creation of economic infrastructure and
community and social assets. The JRY was revamped from 1st April, 1999, as
Jawahar Gram Samriddhi Yojana (JGSY). It now became a programme for the
creation of rural economic infrastructure with employment generation as the
secondary objective.

3. Rural Housing – Indira Awaas Yojana:

The Indira Awaas Yojana (LAY) programme aims at providing free housing to Below
Poverty Line (BPL) families in rural areas and main targets would be the households

32
of SC/STs. It was first merged with the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) in 1989 and in
1996 it broke away from JRY into a separate housing scheme for the rural poor.

4. Food for Work Programme:

The Food for Work Programme was started in 2000-01 as a component of EAS full
form??. It was first launched in eight drought-affected states of Chhattisgarh, Gujarat,
Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Uttaranchal.
It aims at enhancing food security through wage employment. Food grains are
supplied to states free of cost, however, the supply of food grains from the Food
Corporation of India (FCI) godowns has been slow.

5. Sampoorna Gramin Rozgar Yojana (SGRY):

The JGSY, EAS and Food for Work Programme were revamped and merged under
the new Sampoorna Gramin Rozgar Yojana (SGRY) Scheme from 1st September,
2001. The main objective of the scheme continues to be the generation of wage
employment, creation of durable economic infrastructure in rural areas and provision
of food and nutrition security for the poor.

6. Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

(MGNREGA) 2005:

It was launched on February 2, 2005. The Act provides 100 days assured
employment every year to every rural household. One-third of the proposed jobs
would be reserved for women. The central government will also establish National
Employment Guarantee Funds. Similarly, state governments will establish State
Employment Guarantee Funds for implementation of the scheme. Under the
programme, if an applicant is not provided employment within 15 days s/he will be
entitled to a daily unemployment allowance.

Salient features of MGNREGA are:

I. Right based framework

II. Time bound guarantee of employment

III. Labour intensive work

33
IV. Women empowerment

V. Transparency and accountability

VI. Adequate funding by central government

7. National Food for Work Programme:

It was launched on November 14, 2004 in 150 most backward districts of the country.
The objective of the programme was to provide additional resources available under
Sampoorna Grameen Rojgar Yojna. This was 100% centrally funded programme.
Now this programme has been subsumed in the MGNREGA from Feb....... 2, 2006.

8. National Rural Livelihood Mission: Ajeevika (2011)

It is the skill and placement initiative of Ministry of Rural development. It is a part of

National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM)–the mission for poverty reduction is
called Ajeevika (2011). It evolves out the need to diversify the needs of the rural poor
and provide them jobs with regular income on monthly basis. Self Help groups are
formed at the village level to help the needy.

9. Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojna:

The cabinet on March 21, 2015 cleared the scheme to provide skill training to 1.4
million youth with an overall outlay of Rs. 1120 crore. This plan is implemented with
the help of Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship through the National
Skill Development Corporation. It will focus on fresh entrant to the labour market,
especially labour market and class X and XII dropouts.

10. National Heritage Development and Augmentation Yojna

(HRIDAY):

HRIDAY scheme was launched (21 Jan. 2015) to preserve and rejuvenate the rich
cultural heritage of the country. This Rs. 500 crore programme was launched by
Urban Development Ministry in New Delhi. Initially it is launched in 12 cities:
Amritsar, Varanasi, Gaya, Puri, Ajmer, Mathura, Dwarka, Badami, Velankanni,
Kanchipuram, Warangal and Amarvati.
These programmes played/are playing a very crucial role in the development of the all
34
sections of the society so that the concept of holistic development can be ensured in
the real sense.

35
 CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

 REDUCE POVERTY IN INDIA

1. Accelerating Economic Growth:

In the fifties and sixties it was generally thought that poverty in India can be

significantly reduced by accelerating economic growth. According to this view,

benefits of economic growth will trickle down to the poor in the form of more

employment opportunities, greater productivity and higher wages. With this it was
expected that the poor will be raised above the poverty line.

2. Agricultural Growth and Poverty Alleviation:

Agricultural growth has been recognized as an important factor that contributes to

marked reduction in poverty. A study made by Montek Ahuluwalia, former member

of Planning Commission, brought clearly that agricultural growth and poverty are

inversely related; the higher agricultural growth leads to lower poverty ratio. The

experience of Punjab and Haryana in the late sixties and in the seventies confirmed
this inverse relation between agriculture growth and poverty.

3. Speedy Development of Infrastructure:

An important measure to generate employment opportunities for the poor and to raise

their productivity is the speedy development of infrastructure. Since private sector is

not attracted to make adequate investment in infrastructure, public investment needs

to be stepped up for its development. Infrastructure development consists of building

of roads, highways, ports, telecommunication, power and irrigation. They involve

mainly construction work which is highly labour intensive.

These facts suggest, in the first place, that in a country like India where the physical

and social infrastructure is inherited from the pre-liberalisation period is not strong

and redistribution of land on a significant scale is not feasible, public investment

36
needs to be stepped up for expending physical infrastructure in the less developed
areas..

4. Accelerating Human Resource Development:

Besides physical infrastructure development, poverty can also be reduced through

human resource development. Human resource development requires greater

investment in educational facilities such as schools to promote literacy, technical

training institutes and vocational colleges to import skills to the people. Further,

human resource development requires health care by public investment in Primary

Health Centres, dispensaries and hospitals.

6. Access to Assets:
Rapid growth of population after independence has led to greater sub- division and

fragmentation of agricultural holdings and lack of employment opportunities in

industries and other non-farm sectors has worsened the conditions of agricultural
labour and self-employed small farmers.

With no land or little land they can not engage themselves in self-employment activi-

ties for earning adequate income to meet their basic needs. Redistribution of land

through effective redistribution, implementation of tenancy reforms so as to ensure

security of tenure and fixation of fair rent would be an important measure of reducing

rural poverty. Except in case of West Bengal and Kerala land reforms have not been
implemented to reduce rural poverty

7. Access to Credit:
Availability of credit to the poor on easy terms can create the conditions for small

farmers gaining access to productive resources such as HYV seeds fertilizers,

construction of minor irrigation such as wells and tubewells. This will enable the
small farmers to adopt high- yielding technology to raise their productivity.

37
8. Public Distribution System (PDS):
Poor households spend nearly 80 per cent of their income on food. Therefore, an

effective way of raising rural incomes and ensuring food security to the poor

households is an assured supply of adequate quantity of food-grains and other

essential commodities at subsidised prices, that is, at prices which are lower than the
market prices.

A properly functioning public distribution system which is targeted to the poor

households is an important element of the strategy for poverty reduction. The Central

Government Organisation ‘Food Corporation of India’ procures the food-grains from

the farmers at the minimum support prices (MSP) and store them in their warehouses
located throughout the country.

9. Direct Attack on Poverty: Special Employment Schemes for the

Poor:
It was realised in the early seventies that it would take a very long time for economic

growth to generate enough employment opportunities to provide productive

employment to all the unemployed and poor in the country. Therefore, a strategy of

providing employment to the poor in the short run, special schemes of employing

poor on rural public works was proposed by Dandekar and Rath in their now famous
work “Poverty in India”.

38
 Poverty, Inequality and Inclusion

Although inequality is largely structural and historical

Reinforced by economic, social and political processes

The role of state?

The trade-off between growth and redistribution

The entitlement approach

Inclusive growth is not just an economic outcome but also political

Key Issues in Poverty & Inequality

We have identified 35 key issues that are fundamental to understanding the structure
of poverty and inequality. We will soon be adding functionality to make it possible to
search affiliates and media by key issues.

 Children: Effects of family origins, family structure, and family processes on

opportunity
 Citizenship & Civil Rights: Rights and prerogatives of citizens and
discrimination against non-citizens
 Conflict, War, & Instability: Relationship between poverty, inequality, and
social conflict
 Consumption & Lifestyles: Differences across social groups in the consumption
of goods and services
 Crime & the Legal System: Law as a source of inequality and as an instrument
for reducing inequality
 Development Economics: Poverty and inequality in developing economies
 Disabilities: Disability as a cause and consequence of inequality
 Discrimination & Prejudice: Types of discrimination, trends in discrimination,
causes of discrimination
 Education: Access to schooling and returns to schooling
 Elites: Elite cohesiveness, reproduction of elites, power of elites
 Environment: Unequal exposure to social and environmental threats
 Gender: Gender differences in education, occupation, income

39
 Globalization: Effects of globalization on income inequality and job
displacement
 Health & Mental Health: Disparities in health and health care
 History of Inequality: Rise and fall of different types of inequality and
inequality regimes
 Immigration: Discrimination against immigrants, assimilation of immigrants,
immigrant policy
 Income & Wealth: Trends in and sources of income and wealth inequality
 Labor Markets: Trends in employment and unemployment and types of
employment contracts
 Land, Housing, & Homelessness: Differential access to homeownership, causes
and effects of homelessness
 Life course, Family, & Demography: Age discrimination, poverty and aging,
divorce and poverty
 Measurement & Methodology: Methods for monitoring trends in and sources
of poverty and inequality
 Organizations: The effects of different types of personnel systems on inequality
 Philosophy: The ethics of poverty and inequality
 Policy: The effects of social policy on poverty and inequality
 Politics & Political Economy: The structure of the institutions governing
inequality
 Poverty: Trends in poverty, policy and poverty, the experience of poverty
 Public Opinion & Attitudes: Attitudes about poverty and inequality
 Race & Ethnicity: Racial and ethnic differentials in education and income
 Sexual Orientation: Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation
 Social Class & Occupations: The changing structure of social classes and
occupations
 Social Mobility: Rates of social mobility, causes and consequences of social
mobility
 Social Networks: Finding jobs through social networks
 Theory: Theories about the structure and legitimacy of inequality
 Transportation: Disparities in transportation use and effects of such disparities
on inequality
 Future of Inequality: The dynamics making for change and stability in
inequality

40
 CONCLUSION

As a young student, I would like to suggest some factors which would be helpful in
our journey to reduce poverty. Basically we have to take necessary steps to reduce the
population in our world. Natural resources don’t increase according to the population
which is increasing at a high speed. When we consider the families in poor countries,
they have at least six or seven kids. But those kids do not have a proper health or the
parents cannot provide proper education for them. And also those parents cannot
provide good foods filled with suitable nutrients to their kids due to lack of wealth.
Because of that their healthiness decreases by a considerable amount. The
development of their brains becomes insufficient and due to that their ability to get a
proper education decreases.

So taking necessary steps to develop health and education sectors in these countries is
a good way to reduce poverty. So firstly we have to develop services for pregnant
women of those countries and provide them good foods filled with proper nutrients to
keep the babies in good health. And then the kids will be in good health and their
brains will be in a better condition to get a proper education. Developing the
education sectors of those countries with the help of charity services and the
governments of developed countries is also a good step to develop education systems
in those countries. When we take a look at the situation of education in a number of
African countries affected by poverty we see: language barriers; a lack of proper
facilities; and military conflicts.

Increasing the number of organizations which are working to reduce poverty by

educating people of developed countries to be organized and to take actions related to
this matter is also another suggestion of mine. Encouraging people who have
volunteered to provide facilities such as pure water, foods filled with nutrients, living
places to poor people and who’re conducting charity services to develop the lives of
them, by offering special rewards and admiring them in various ways would be a
good way to increase the number of voluntary workers. So I believe my opinions and
suggestions would be a good help to conclude poverty.

41
REFERENCE

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1)

1. INDIA FOODBANKING NETWORK 2) HOW TO END GLOBAL

POVERTY? : THE BORGEN PROJECT 3) WIKIPEDIA 4)
http://www.importantindia.com/783/poverty-in-india/

2. Pathak, V. (2014). Essay on Poverty in India: Causes, Effects and Solutions -

Important India. [Online] Important India. Available at:
http://www.importantindia.com/10335/essay-on-causes-and-solutions-of-poverty-in-
india/ [Accessed 28 Oct. 2015].

3. Poverty. [online] Available at: http://www.who.int/topics/poverty/en/ [Accessed 22 Oct.

2015].

4. 4 Main Causes of Poverty in India – Explained!. [online] Available at:

http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/poverty/4-main-causes-of-poverty-in-india-
explained/4819/ [Accessed 28 Oct. 2015].

5. 45 Surprising Facts About Extreme Poverty Around the World You May Not Have
Realized. [online] Available at: http://mic.com/articles/89717/45-surprising-facts-
about-extreme-poverty-around-the-world-you-may-not-have-realized [Accessed 26
Oct. 2015]

6. 5 Effects of Poverty - The Borgen Project. [online] Available at:

http://borgenproject.org/5-effects-poverty/ [Accessed 20 Oct. 2015]..

7. Book Indian economy

8. Economics times

9. http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/ Worlds Apart: Measuring

International and Global Inequality, Branko Milanovic

42