POVERTY IN INDIA

HUNGER, UNDER-NUTRITION AND POVERTY
There has been a vigorous debate on the extent and severity of poverty in India in recent
years-more specifically, in the context of stabilisation and other policy reforms initiated
in mid-1991-the interrelationship between hunger and poverty has received limited attention.
Essentially, the methodology used relies on the affordability of a nutritionally adequate
diet. There are differences in food consumption patterns and the appropriateness of
different price deflators. In contrast, the present analysis focuses on the extent and
determinants of hunger, and on remedial action.Although both supply and demand matter, it
is the latter that has the more decisive influence on food consumption through its impact on
price. The role of demand is further investigated through an analysis of the inequality in
food expenditure and calories consumed. Specifically, it is demonstrated that the low share
of food expenditure of, and calories consumed by, the poor reflect their low share of income.
This is supplemented by an analysis of the determinants of hunger. (Gaiha, 1997)

MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
The magnitude of rural poverty is larger than to urban poverty in India. The basic explanation
for sectoral poverty differentiates in India is the misallocation of resources and urban-biased
strategy of development. Investment allocation in Indian planning is not strictly based on
the consideration of equity and economic efficiency. The rural sector gets the smaller share
of investible resources, and therefore rural income, output and employment fall short of the
optimum level, and rural poverty intensifies. Rural India abounds in poverty. Both in absolute
and in relative terms, rural poverty represents a staggering dimension. The official figures,
of course, claim that a regime of declining poverty is gradually ushering in. But there is no
scope for complacency. It is still a substantial figure. Poverty affects 22 per cent of the
rural population and 12 per cent of the urban population in India. (Ghosh, 2002)

IMPACT OF IRRIGATION
The empirical results of the study show that the marginal impact of irrigation (i.e. direct impact of
irrigation) is relatively higher on the rural poverty level in India than any other factors included
in the analysis. This means that the future strategy on rural-poverty alleviation in India largely
depends on how efficiently irrigated agriculture is managed, its performance level and access to
irrigation, in general. The study also reveals the interesting point that the marginal impact of
groundwater irrigation on spatial and temporal variation of poverty in India was higher than the
marginal impact of canal irrigation. It implies that it is not only the level of overall irrigation
access but also the structure and source of irrigation that are important in determining the scale of
irrigation impact on rural poverty level in India. Followed by irrigation, the rural literacy rate has
turned out to be another important factor in explaining the variation in rural poverty in India. An
improved literacy rate facilitates farmers not only to get better access to agricultural markets but
also helps them to use improved farm-management practices. This also increases labour productivity by
facilitating labour mobility across the sectors (regions) and, in turn, better labour income.
(Bhattarai, 2003)

EMPLOYMENT MIGRATION AND POVERTY
At the national level, the level, depth, and severity of poverty among non-migrants is higher
than among migrants. Controlling for socioeconomic correlates, the incidence of poverty among
migrant households is lowered compared to non-migrant households in many of the states in India.
This is indicative of the fact that migration has a positive impact on reducing the poverty
status of a household, and this findings is consistent with earlier studies (Arjan and Dubey2006;
Kundu and Sarangi 2007). At the state level, the inter-state migration accounts for a larger share
of employment-related migration from the less developed states, while intra-state migration
accounts for a larger share in more developed states barring Kerala and Punjab that have high
shares of emigrants. The extent of economic inequality is higher in the more developed states
of India. This is possibly because migration from less developed states is poverty induced while
that from more developed states is for better employment opportunities. (Mohanty, 2016)

CHILDREN FROM POOR HOUSEHOLDS
Research on developmental outcomes of children has identified several specific risk factors, and poverty
is among the most commonly investigated of socio-demographic risk variables. Children experience poverty
as an environment that is damaging to their physical, mental, emotional, and moral development. Living in
poverty has been connected to poor cognitive and behavioral outcomes. Past research has consistently shown
differences in behavioral outcomes of advantaged and disadvantaged children, favoring those from higher
income families. Although children from impoverished conditions perform more poorly than their counterparts
on behavioral outcomes, not all children develop maladaptive behavior. Studies on poor children have also
furnished evidence that there are many children who are at risk for developing behavioral problems, but do
not develop problems. They bounce back from the negative effects of risk conditions and develop into
well-functioning and competent individuals who are free from any notable developmental
problem. (Gulati, 2008)

CHILDREN SCHOOLING
Children are at great risk of experiencing exclusion within school due to poverty in their household
(Ridge, 2002). Poverty is Bijaya Kumar Malik 82 clearly a risk factor for children’s poor development and
limited educational outcomes, and it may be that risk in the early years will continue to have an effect
even if the family moves out of poverty later in the child’s life (Patrice et al., 2008). Due to deprivation
there is limited access to good education and less participation in elementary education(Chaudhuri & Jha,2011).
Longer periods of poverty in families, non-availability of and poor accessibility to schools in the locality
and lack of proper transportation have forced many children to leave the school and work in hazardous
situations (Times of India, 2012). Children from disadvantaged households perform poorly (low scores) compared
to peers from more advantaged backgrounds. (Malik, 2013)

POVERTY AND EMPLOYMENT
Youth from the poorest households are in the labour force and are more deprived or unemployed compared
to youth from the richest households and also those from the other three quintiles/economic levels of
households in these six states. The father’s education and education of youth is the second pillar of
youth development in India, which is influenced by the educational level of both. The higher the
education of the father, the lesser the number of youth working in the labour force. These six States have
differ in the patterns of youth development. Moreover, rural youth are more disadvantaged than urban youth,
and female youth are more disadvantaged than male youth in these six states of India, irrespective of caste
and region. Poverty/wealth index is an influential factor for youth development in India, which may be
considered the first pillar of youth development. In every situation, the wealth index clearly shows that
the lower the economic condition of the household, the more disadvantaged the youth. Poverty definitely
leaves its mark on youth development in India. (Malik, 2015)

URBANIZATION OF POVERTY
Over the past few decades, India’s modernization process has led to rapid expansion of urban
centers and remarkable rise in urban population. What has been of particular concern is that
rapid urbanization has been accompanied by a steady growth in the number of urban poor and the
“urbanization of poverty” (Piel 1997). The numbers of urban poor have risen by 34.4 percent,
from 60 million persons in 1973-74 to 80.8 million persons in 2004-05 (Gol and MoHUPA, 2009).
In contrast, the numbers of rural poor have declined by 15.5 percent over the same period.
Urban poverty has been a problem affecting the Indian society for the last few decades and is
a serious challenge to the intellectuals, politicians, and planners (Hashim, 2009; Nath, 1994).
Since the Sixth Five Year Plan, a sizeable reduction in the magnitude of urban poverty has been
one of the major objectives of planning in India. (Yenneti, 2017)

IMPACT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS ON POVERTY
The impact of financial development, economic growth and income inequality on poverty in India from 1970 to
2015 is examined by employing the autoregressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds testing procedure. The findings
reveal a robust long-run relationship between financial development, economic growth, inequality and poverty.
Results show that financial development and economic growth help in poverty reduction in India, whereas income
inequality and inflation aggravate poverty. Empirical evidence of the Granger-causality test supports the
presence of unidirectional causality from financial development and economic growth to poverty. Moreover,
bidirectional causality exists between inequality and poverty. The present study provides evidence on which
the policymakers may proceed with detailed investigation of how specific financial sector policies and
interventions can be deployed as effective instruments for achieving favorable economic growth and income
distribution. The study recommends that policies geared toward increasing financial development and economic
growth should be adopted to reduce the high level of poverty and inequality currently prevailing in
India. (Sehrawat, 2018)

FROM POVERTY TO DEVELOPMENT
Poverty is rooted in social relations. Despite legislation against untouchability, the lower castes are
systematically discriminated against at village level in access to such natural resources as water, in claiming
the rights reserved for them (such as reserved seats in local government) and in accessing government poverty
schemes and programmes directed towards the poor. While caste based relations are more fluid in urban slums,
and so impose fewer limits on the opportunities open to rural out-migrants, those remaining in villages remain
deeply enmeshed in all-pervasive webs of restrictions. A set of structural problems manifests itself at higher
political levels: the Bank correctly notes that the poor are increasingly concentrated in States showing weak
economic performance. Yet some of these (Bihar, for instance) have abundant natural resources and, with
comparatively little effort, could easily join the economically more ‘progressive’ States. As has long been
recognised within India, chronic political failure in some of the ‘backward’ States, often rooted in semi-feudal
social relations, is largely to blame for weak performance against economic and social indicators. How to deal
with such failure is one of the most pressing challenges on the poverty reduction agenda in India. Many of the
poor attempt to cope through seasonal and permanent out-migration.(Farrington, 2001)

CONCLUSION
Starting off with the main concern, that is poverty in india, which later leads on to generate various other side-
effects that comes with it. When theres poverty, people will not be able to afford nutritious food items, and hence
the demand of high calorie food with high prices may not be an option for a poor person to opt for. Then this will
lead to hunger and malnourishment. It is also been noted that the percentage of poor people mostly belong to rural
areas than in the urban areas and due to misallocation of resources most of them start to migrate in the urban areas
where there is large number of resources. It is also been noticed that reason behind this rural poverty is due to the
lack of proper irrigation and illiteracy among farmers which again increase the poverty level, because most people in
rural areas are related to agricultural job. This also affects the well being of the whole family, specially the
children.Research on developmental outcomes of children has identified several specific risk factors, and poverty is
among the most commonly investigated of socio-demographic risk variables. Children experience poverty as an
environment that is damaging to their physical, mental, emotional, and moral development. Living in poverty has been
connected to poor cognitive and behavioral outcomes. And children are at great risk of experiencing exclusion within
school due to povertyin their household. Longer periods of poverty in families, non-availability of and poor
accessibility to schools in the locality and lack of proper transportation have forced many children to leave the
school and work in hazardous situations. And when these children grow up, they find it difficult to find an employment
Youth from the poorest households are in the labour force and are more deprived or unemployed compared to youth from
the richest households. Then urbanization led to a slight reduction in the overall percentage of poverty to some extent.
Then there are factors which can help in reduction of poverty and there are those factors which aggravates it. So the
policies were aimed towards the factors which can help in reducing the poverty. Then finally some points were made
about how povery can be reduced and india can be let to further development.

REFERENCE
Bhattarai, M., & Narayanamoorthy, A. (2003). Impact of irrigation on rural poverty in india: An aggregate panel-data
analysis. Water Policy, 5(5-6), 443-458. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1943058786?accountid=141537
Farrington, J. (2001). India: Reducing poverty, accelerating development. The Journal of Development Studies, 38(2),
195-195+. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/220603390?accountid=141537
Gaiha, R. (1997). Hunger, undernutrition and poverty in india. Contemporary South Asia, 6(2),
161-175. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09584939708719811
Ghosh, B. N. (2002). Allocative inefficiency and rural poverty in india. International Journal of Social Economics,
29(1), 87-96. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03068290210413001
Gulati, J. K., & Dutta, J. (2008). Risk, conflict between parents and child adjustment in families experiencing
persistent poverty in india. Journal of Family Studies, 14(1), 107-123. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/jfs.327.14.1.107
Malik, B. K. (2013). Child schooling and child work in india: Does poverty matter? International Journal of Child Care
and Education Policy, 7(2), 80-101. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/2288-6729-7-1-80
Malik, B. K. (2015). Youth development in india: Does poverty matter? SpringerPlus, 4(1),
1-10. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1410-z
Mohanty, S. K., Mohapatra, S. R., Kastor, A., Singh, A. K., & Mahapatra, B. (2016). Does employment-related migration
reduce poverty in india? Journal of International Migration and Integration, 17(3),
761-784. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12134-015-0436-y
Sehrawat, M., & Giri, A. K. (2018). The impact of financial development, economic growth, income inequality on
poverty: Evidence from india. Empirical Economics, 55(4), 1585-1602. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00181-017-1321-7
Yenneti, K., Wei, Y. D., & Chen, W. (2017). THE URBANIZATION OF POVERTY IN INDIA: SPATIOTEMPORAL DISPARITIES IN
CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURES. Geographical Review, 107(2), 360-383.
Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1874001169?accountid=141537