An intractable problem?

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) talk about eradication of poverty by 2030. However, India, particularly states like Uttar Pradesh (UP), are still far away from achieving this milestone. We cannot claim to be an emerging economy that is on the path of attaining a developed nation status if millions in our country still suffer from hunger, malnutrition and poverty. The situation in the populous state of UP, to where I belong, is indeed a matter of great concern.

Different definitions and measures of poverty have been used over time, which are largely based on a minimum income level required to buy a basket of goods. I recall that during my student days we used to talk about the Dandekar and Rath (1971) model which assumed that a person required 2,250 calories per day, and accordingly calculated Rs 15 per capita per month for rural areas and Rs 22.50 per capita per month for urban areas as the poverty line. In 2009, an expert group, setup under Tendulkar, gave the figure of Rs 816 for rural and Rs 1,000 for urban areas. Then again, the Rangarajan committee in 2011 came out with a calculation of Rs 972 for rural and Rs 1,400 for urban areas. I remember, while in service, when we had to target beneficiary-oriented schemes we used to consider the list of people below poverty line (BPL). A socio-economic survey (SEC) in 2011 used various criteria to prepare the BPL list which has since then been used in all rural development schemes.

Most of these poverty measures, except the one by SEC, have used per capita income required to buy a minimum quantity of goods as the poverty line. However, it has become increasingly clear that poverty is an issue of multidimensional deprivation. Accordingly, NITI Aayog has constructed a multidimensional poverty index (MPI) and has just released the current results. MPI has three equally weighted dimensions of health, education and standard of living. For this purpose, 12 indicators are used — nutrition, child and adolescent mortality, antenatal care, years of schooling, school attendance, cooking fuel, sanitation, drinking water, electricity, housing and assets and bank accounts. These are very broad areas but have a significant impact on the quality of life. This kind of analysis would lead to an in-depth understanding of the problem and help the government to plan sector-wise policy responses.

It is significant to note that UP has a poverty index of 37.79 per cent, which means that the majority of the population is still struggling to manage a decent standard of living. Bihar is at the bottom of the table, having a poverty index of 50 per cent while Kerala is at the top with a poverty index only 0.71 per cent. Among the advanced states, Tamil Nadu has an index of 4.89 per cent. These figures clearly show wide regional disparities but also indicate what is possible. There is no reason why UP cannot study the Kerala story and come out with policies to address each and every indicator in the index and reduce its poverty level within a given time frame. On a closer analysis, it is surprising to find that UP fares poorly on indicators like cooking fuel, sanitation and housing. This is despite the recent emphasis and success stories related to Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna, and Ujjwala Yojna. I guess the recent achievements under these schemes have not been fully accounted for as yet. Within UP also, there are huge disparities among districts. The districts of Balrampur, Shravasti and Bahraich are very high on the poverty index. This indicates that UP will have to design region-specific policy interventions.

The elections to the UP assembly are round the corner. Elimination of poverty should be the major thrust in the development agenda of all contesting parties. In 1971, Indira Gandhi went to the polls with the slogan of Gareebi Hataoo, which resonated wonderfully with the poor, who voted her to power with a huge majority. I remember that on joining the IAS, we used to monitor what was known as a 20-point programme for the development of the country; it focused on poverty alleviation. Several beneficiary-oriented schemes like Integrated Rural Development Programme and National Rural Employment Programme were conceived. These efforts led to a reduction in poverty but not eradication. In fact, it was during the period between 2005-06 to 2014-15 that maximum people came out of poverty. This was made possible through a high rate of growth from 2004-05 to 2010-11. This implies that a high rate of growth can, by itself, bring about considerable reduction in the level of poverty. However, the recent context is that of jobless growth leading to underemployment and unemployment — slowing down the process of poverty reduction.

Focusing on physical infrastructure like roads and energy lays the basis of faster economic growth, but unless we create a socio-economic environment where growth does not lead to widening of inequalities, poverty would continue to plague us. We can see the example of Kerala and Tamil Nadu where social indicators of health and education have indicated good progress and this is the reason why they have almost succeeded in doing away with the scourge of poverty. Any party coming to power in UP must spell out its commitment towards nutrition, health and education. To my mind, the single most important factor is the education of the girl child. UP should aim to provide free education to girls till graduation level; this will take care of issues like infant and maternal mortality. The primary education scenario in UP is crying out for urgent and serious reforms as, currently, the entire system is in shambles.

Flagship government schemes targeting poverty include Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) and National Rural Livelihood Mission (NRLM) — both of which focus on wage employment and self employment respectively. The situation in UP is that agriculture contributes 25 per cent to the state's domestic product and 65 per cent of the population is dependent on agriculture. This is the prime reason for a high level of poverty. Immediate measures are required for improving the agriculture productivity and also enabling the farmer to get a remunerative price for his produce. The problem of small and marginal landholdings needs to be addressed by aggregation through farmer Producer Companies or cooperatives. This has to be coupled with creating hubs or rural industrialisation which would create jobs nearer home for those displaced from the farm sector. Poverty will be reduced only when labor moves from farm to non-farm occupations. In addition, specific interventions are required to upgrade the quality of education and healthcare, and to directly address the issue of malnutrition. If these specific policy initiatives are taken then we can hope to eradicate poverty from UP, which is essential if we want to talk about a poverty-free India.

The writer is an ex-Chief Secretary, Govt of Uttar Pradesh. Views expressed are personal