Artha Vijnana: Journal of The Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Is the Growth Pro-Poor in Odisha Since 1990’s?


Affiliations
1 Department of Economics, Banaras Hindu University, 221005, Uttar Pradesh, India
2 Department of Economics and Finance, BITS Pillani, 333031, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


This study examines whether the economic growth in Odisha is pro-poor since the 1990s by applying, Pro-poor Growth Index (PGI), Poverty Equivalent Growth (PEG), Growth Incidence Curve (GIC) methods and using the NSSO 1993-1994, 2004-2005 and 2011-2012 Consumer Expenditure Survey. The change in poverty has been decomposed into growth in income (MPCE) and redistribution to look into the pro-poorness effect of growth. The results show that the slower rise in MPCE and faster increase in inequality, which offset the poverty reduction in the 1st period, causes a slow reduction in poverty. The faster reduction in inequality in the 2nd period with an increase in real MPCE has resulted in more rapid reduction in poverty in the state. Throughout the analysis, the growth effect of poverty reduction outweighs the inequality effect, causing a reduction in poverty in Odisha. The PGI, PEG and GIC show that the 2nd period in Odisha is pro-poor.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Ahluwalia, M.S. (1978), Rural Poverty and Agricultural Performance in India, The Journal of Development Studies, 14(3): 298-323.

  • ---------- (2001), State Level Performance under Economic Reforms in India, Center for Research on Economic Development and Policy Reform, Working Paper No. 96.

  • Ahluwalia, M.S. and H. Chenery (1974), A Model of Distribution and Growth, In Redistribution with Growth; Policies to Improve Income Distribution in Developing Countries in the Context of Economic Growth,pp. 209-235, Oxford University Press, London.

  • Behera, D.K. (2012), Economic Growth and Sectoral Linkages: Empirical Evidence from Odisha, Journal of Regional Development and Planning, 1(2): 91-102.

  • Besley, T., R. Burgess and B. Esteve-Volart (2005), Operationalizing Pro-Poor Growth: India Case Study, Department of Economics, London School of Economics.

  • Bhanumurthy, N.R., and A. Mitra (2004), Economic Growth, Poverty, and Inequality in Indian States in the Pre-Reform and Reform Periods, Asian Development Review, 21(2): 79-99.

  • Census of India (2011), Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner.

  • Chauhan, R.K., S.K. Mohanty, S.V. Subramanian, J.K. Parida, and B. Padhi (2016), Regional Estimates of Poverty and Inequality in India, 1993–2012, Social Indicators Research, 127(3): 1249-1296.

  • Datt, G. and M. Ravallion (1992), Growth and Redistribution Components of Changes in Poverty Measures: A Decomposition with Applications to Brazil and India in the 1980s, Journal of Development Economics, 38(2): 275-295.

  • ---------- (1998), Why Have Some Indian States Done Better than Others at Reducing Rural Poverty?, Economica, 65(257): 17-38.

  • ---------- (2002), Is India's Economic Growth Leaving the Poor Behind?, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(3): 89-108.

  • De Haan, A. and A. Dubey (2005), Poverty, Disparities, or the Development of Underdevelopment in Orissa, Economic and Political Weekly, 40(22-23): 2321-2329.

  • Economic Survey of Orissa(2016-17), Finance Department, Government of Orissa.

  • Jain, L.R. and S.D. Tendulkar (1990), Role of Growth and Distribution in the Observed Change in Headcount Ratio Measure of Poverty: A Decomposition Exercise for India, Indian Economic Review, 25(2): 165-205.

  • Kakwani, N. and E.M. Pernia (2000), What is Pro-Poor Growth?, Asian Development Review, 18(1): 1-16.

  • Kakwani, N. and H.H. Son (2008), Poverty Equivalent Growth Rate, Review of Income and Wealth, 54(4): 643-655.

  • Kakwani, N., B. Prakash and H. Son (2000), Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Introduction, Asian Development Review, 18(2): 1-21

  • Kumar, U. and A. Subramanian (2012), Growth in India's States in the First Decade of the 21 st Century: Four Facts, Economic and Political Weekly, 47(3): 48-57.

  • Meher, S. (2003), Dynamics of Economic Development in Orissa, Review of Development and Change, 13(2): 221-248.

  • Mishra, B. (2010), Agriculture, Industry, and Mining in Orissa in the Post-Liberalisation Era: An Inter-District and Inter-State Panel Analysis, Economic and Political Weekly, 45(20): 49-68.

  • Mishra, S. (2012), Poverty and Agrarian Distress in Orissa, Working Paper series, IGIDR.

  • ---------- (2015), Decomposing Poverty Change: Deciphering Change in Total Population and Beyond, Review of Income and Wealth, 61(4): 799-811

  • Mookherjee, D. (2014), MNREGA: Populist Leaky Bucket or Anti-Poverty Success?, International Growth Centre Blog, Retrieved from https://www.theigc.org/blog/mnrega-populist-leaky-bucket-or-anti-poverty-success/

  • NCEUS (2009), The Challenge of Employment in India: An Informal Economy Perspective, National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector.

  • OECD (2001), Rising to the Global Challenge: Partnership for Reducing World Poverty, Statement by the DAC High Level Meeting, April 25-26, 2001. Paris:

  • OECD ---------- (2007), Promoting Pro-Poor Growth, Policy Guidance for Donors, DAC Guidelines and Reference Series.

  • Padhi, B. and S. Panda (2020), Employment and Economic Growth Dynamics in Odisha, India, Journal of Public Affairs, 21(2): e2168.

  • Panda, M. (2009), Economic Development in Orissa: Growth Without Inclusion, in Orissa’s Economic Development: Experiences and Expectations,Panda Raj Kishor (Eds.), Serial Publications.

  • Panda, S.C. (2015), Economic Growth, Inequality and Poverty in Odisha, in Trend, Magnitude and Dimensions of Inequality in Post Reform India,R.K. Panda and R.K. Meher (Eds.), Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi.

  • Pathak, D.C. (2010), Poverty and Inequality in Uttar Pradesh during 1993-94 to 2004-05: A Decomposition Analysis, Available at SSRN 1725804.

  • Pernia, E.M. (2003), Pro-Poor Growth: What is It and How is It Important?,Retrieved from https://www.think-asia.org/bitstream/handle/11540/620/pb017.pdf?sequence=1

  • Planning Commission (1993), Report of the Expert Group on Estimation of Proportion and Number of Poor, Government of India. ---------- (2002), Orissa Development Report, Government of India, New Delhi.

  • ---------- (2009), Report of the Expert Group to Review the Methodology for Estimation of Poverty, Government of India, No. 32.

  • ---------- (2011), Report of the Expert Group to Review the Methodology for Estimation of Poverty,(No. id: 4531).

  • Rajan, R., T.K. Pandey, N.G. Jayal, B. Ramaswami and S. Gupta (2013), Report of the Committee for Evolving a Composite Development Index of States,Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

  • Ravallion, M. and G. Datt (1991), Growth and Redistribution Components of Changes in Poverty Measures: A Decomposition with Applications to Brazil and India in the 1980s, World Bank Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper, 83.

  • ---------- (1996), How Important to India's Poor is the Sectoral Composition of Economic Growth?, The World Bank Economic Review, 10(1): 1-25.

  • ---------- (2002), Why has Economic Growth been More Pro-Poor in Some States of India than Others?, Journal of Development Economics, 68(2): 381-400.

  • Ravallion, M. and S. Chen (2003), Measuring Pro-Poor Growth, Economics Letters, 78(1): 93-99.

  • Sahoo, P. (2019), Poverty in Odisha; An analysis of Inclusiveness, Indian Journal of Economics, XCIX (392): 99-119.

  • Sahoo, P, D. Sahoo and S. Chandra (2020), Changes in Rural Poverty among Occupational Groups in Odisha: An Analysis of Post Reform Period, Journal of Land and Rural Studies, 8(2): 150-165.

  • Sahoo, P. and D.P. Joshi (2018), Growth and Structural Change in Odisha, Journal of Regional Development and Planning, 7(1): 17-30.

  • Sahu, J.P. and S. Panda (2018), Political Regime Persistence and Economic Growth in Odisha: An Empirical Assessment of the Naveen Patnaik Rule, Economics Bulletin, 38(1): 610-622.

  • Samantaraya, A., A.K. Sahoo, A. Mallick and B. Bhuyna (2014), Has Odisha became Less Poor in the Last Decade, Economic and Political Weekly, 49(46): 62-67.

  • Son, H.H. (2004), A Note on Pro-Poor Growth, Economics Letters, 82(3): 307-314.

  • Thorat, Sukhadeo, and Amaresh Dubey (2012), Has Growth been Socially Inclusive during 1993–94–2009–10, Economic and Political Weekly, 47(10): 43-53.

  • Tiwari, S. (2014), Assessment of Growth Poverty and Inequality in Uttar Pradesh: A Long Term Analysis, Journal of Economic and Social Development, 10(1): 31-44.

  • United Nations (2000), A Better World for All: A Progress Towards International Developmental Goals, United Nations Report.


Abstract Views: 916

PDF Views: 2




  • Is the Growth Pro-Poor in Odisha Since 1990’s?

Abstract Views: 916  |  PDF Views: 2

Authors

Priyabrata Sahoo
Department of Economics, Banaras Hindu University, 221005, Uttar Pradesh, India
Balakrushna Padhi
Department of Economics and Finance, BITS Pillani, 333031, India

Abstract


This study examines whether the economic growth in Odisha is pro-poor since the 1990s by applying, Pro-poor Growth Index (PGI), Poverty Equivalent Growth (PEG), Growth Incidence Curve (GIC) methods and using the NSSO 1993-1994, 2004-2005 and 2011-2012 Consumer Expenditure Survey. The change in poverty has been decomposed into growth in income (MPCE) and redistribution to look into the pro-poorness effect of growth. The results show that the slower rise in MPCE and faster increase in inequality, which offset the poverty reduction in the 1st period, causes a slow reduction in poverty. The faster reduction in inequality in the 2nd period with an increase in real MPCE has resulted in more rapid reduction in poverty in the state. Throughout the analysis, the growth effect of poverty reduction outweighs the inequality effect, causing a reduction in poverty in Odisha. The PGI, PEG and GIC show that the 2nd period in Odisha is pro-poor.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.21648/arthavij%2F2022%2Fv64%2Fi3%2F215279